Syracuse University
SURFACE
Dissertations - ALL
SURFACE
May 2016
The Post-Colonial Language and Identity
Experiences of Transnational Kenyan Teachers in
U.S. Universities
Rosemary N. Nduati
Syracuse University
Follow this and additional works at: http://surface.syr.edu/etd
Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons
Recommended Citation
Nduati, Rosemary N., "The Post-Colonial Language and Identity Experiences of Transnational Kenyan Teachers in U.S. Universities"
(2016). Dissertations - ALL. Paper 445.
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL
by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected].
ABSTRACT
This qualitative interview study explored how transnational Kenyan teachers
experienced marginalization of their African languages and identities in both the Kenyan
and the United States contexts, but reclaimed those languages and identities as important
assets in their teaching of English language. The study asked: What are the post-colonial
language and identity experiences of transnational Kenyan teachers in graduate education
programs in the United States in the following domains: a) their primary and secondary
schooling in Kenya b) their teacher preparation in Kenya c) their teaching experiences in
Kenya; and d) their graduate education in the United States?
Post-colonial theories and linguistic imperialism theories provided a lens for
understanding participants’ language and identity experiences in Kenya, a post-colonial
African nation that adopted English as the language of instruction in schools following
independence, and in the United States, where issues of language, race, and power are
intrinsically connected. Data sources included transcripts from fifty open-ended
qualitative interviews, which were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify themes
within and across participants’ experiences.
Two major themes emerged from the analysis. The first major theme was
marginalization. Participants’ African languages and identities were marginalized in both
the Kenyan and the United States contexts. However, in various ways, participants
resisted this marginalization. The second major theme was that participants (re)claimed
their African languages and identities as assets, both in their personal lives, and their
professional lives as teachers and future teacher educators. These findings have
implications for literacy research and practice in Kenyan education, as well as for
educational research and practice in U.S. universities.
THE POST-COLONIAL LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY EXPERIENCES OF
TRANSNATIONAL KENYAN TEACHERS IN U.S. UNIVERSITIES
By
Rosemary Nyaboke Nduati
B.Ed. Kenyatta University, 2007
M.F.A. Syracuse University, 2010
DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy in Literacy Education in the Graduate School of Syracuse University
May 2016
Copyright © 2016 Rosemary Nyaboke Nduati
All Rights Reserved
DEDICATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This dissertation is dedicated to my beloved children (Biko, Mokua, and Imani), and to
my dear husband, Mark.
With great appreciation, a special thank you to the participants in this research,
without whose generous participation this dissertation would not have been possible.
Thank you for your time and willingness to share your experiences with me. I enjoyed
getting to know each and every one of you. It was an honor I truly appreciate.
I would like to acknowledge and appreciate my advisor and dissertation chair, Dr.
Marcelle Haddix, for her mentorship throughout my doctoral process. I also want to
thank Dr. Kathleen Hinchman, for her mentorship, her kindness, and for providing
opportunities to work and grow in the profession through Literacy Clinic. Thank you to
Dr. Kelly Chandler-Olcott, for providing opportunities to work and build my professional
portfolio. Thank you for being an outstanding role model in the profession, and for
providing guidance and strong support in my growth as a future teacher educator. I highly
appreciate that each of you took the time to read my work and provide feedback that
helped with the sharpening and completion of this dissertation work.
I would also like to thank the entire faculty in the School of Education at Syracuse
University for their support throughout this process, whether through classes that I took
with them, professional events that we attended together, or simply conversations that
helped shape me as a teacher and researcher.
v Special thanks to Arthur Flowers, my mentor and friend, for introducing me to the
possibility of pursuing graduate studies in the United States. Thank you for taking the
time to read and critique my creative work even though I was practically a stranger to you
at the time. Thank you for your generosity, friendship, and mentorship as I worked to find
my voice as a writer while simultaneously trying to navigate a new country and culture.
Thank you to the entire faculty in the English department at Syracuse University for
selflessly reading my work and providing rich feedback as I pursued my master’s degree.
Finally, my heartfelt thanks to my beloved family. My late mother, Anastancia
Kinanga Ogugu, and my late father, David Ogugu. Your lives were cut short too soon,
but I hope you can look down on your children and be proud of how we all turned out.
My sisters and brothers, and my niece and nephews. Thank you for being a great support
system despite living on different continents. I also want to thank my extended family
(the Ogage family most especially) for support and prayers, and my uncle, Dr. Elias
Mokua, SJ for setting a great example of academic excellence. Most importantly though,
I want to appreciate my husband, Mark, for his patience, his encouragement, his undying
love, and his unwavering support. Thank you darling for being someone I can always
count on to be in my corner, for being my love, my forever partner in life. I also want to
express my deepest love and appreciation for my children; Biko, Mokua, and Imani. The
three of you made this journey worthwhile. You gave me reason and motivation to want
the best for me, so I can be the best for you. Thank you for your unconditional love, your
patience, and your endurance as I pursued this doctorate. I am richly blessed to have you
all in my life.
vi Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER ONE: .............................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
Historical Context of Kenyan Language Policies and Education .......................................... 2
Significance of Current Study ................................................................................................... 8
Research Question .................................................................................................................... 13
Definition of Key Terms .......................................................................................................... 14
Overview of Chapters .............................................................................................................. 24
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................ 27
LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................. 27
Language and Identity in Post-colonial Africa ...................................................................... 31
Language and Identity in the United States .......................................................................... 45
Language and Hybridity.......................................................................................................... 53
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 59
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS ........................................................................................... 61
Post-colonial Theories ........................................................................................................... 61
Post-colonial theorists and their contributions to the theory ................................................. 62
Post-colonial theory and issues of identity ............................................................................ 71
Linguistic Imperialism Theories ............................................................................................ 73
CHAPTER THREE:....................................................................................................... 82
METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................... 82
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 82
Participants ............................................................................................................................... 84
Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 99
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 103
Researcher Subjectivities....................................................................................................... 115
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 127
CHAPTER FOUR......................................................................................................... 130
“THE WHOLE DAY THEY NEVER OPENED THEIR MOUTH”: THE
MARGINALIZATION OF AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND IDENTITIES IN
KENYA AND THE UNITED STATES ...................................................................... 130
Kenyan Context ...................................................................................................................... 132
Punishing Students’ Use of African Languages .................................................................. 133
Silencing of African Languages and Identities .................................................................... 140
The Hierarchy of Languages and Identities ......................................................................... 147
Resisting the Marginalization of African Languages .......................................................... 161
United States Context ............................................................................................................ 169
Becoming Raced .................................................................................................................. 169
Linguistic and Racial Stereotyping in the United States ..................................................... 173
Silencing of African Languages and Identities .................................................................... 184
Responses to Marginalization .............................................................................................. 197
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 209
vii CHAPTER FIVE .......................................................................................................... 212
“IT’S LIKE I AM TAKING SOME REST FROM A LOT OF ENGLISH”:
(RE)CLAIMING AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND IDENTITIES IN KENYA AND
THE UNITED STATES ............................................................................................... 212
Kenyan Context ...................................................................................................................... 215
Nuances of Language and Identity Affiliations ................................................................... 216
Honoring Students’ Home Languages ................................................................................. 227
United States Context ............................................................................................................ 240
Nuances of Language and Identity Affiliations ................................................................... 241
African Languages and Identities as Capital ....................................................................... 253
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 257
CHAPTER SIX ............................................................................................................. 261
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS .................................................................... 261
Revisiting the Study ............................................................................................................... 261
Discussion of Findings............................................................................................................ 263
Limitations and Implications ................................................................................................ 274
Limitations and Implications for Further Research ............................................................. 274
Implications for Literacy Research and Practice in Kenyan Education .............................. 277
Implications for Educational Research and Practice in U.S. Universities ........................... 282
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 288
APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................ 292
References ...................................................................................................................... 303
VITA .............................................................................................................................. 315
viii LIST OF FIGURES
Table 1.1: Definition of key terms specific to the Kenyan education system………... 16
Table 3.1: A summary of participant profiles…………………………………………… 86
Figure 3.2: Stages and steps for thematic analysis…………………………………….105
Figure 3.3: Themes and subthemes from the data……………………………………...114
ix CHAPTER ONE:
INTRODUCTION
The teachers interviewed for this dissertation study experienced marginalization
of their African languages in both the Kenyan and the United States contexts, but in
various ways, they reclaimed those languages as important assets in both their personal
lives, and their professional lives as teachers charged with teaching in English. The
purpose of this study was to highlight the experiences of these ten transnational Kenyan
teachers with their identities as speakers of African languages. Chapter one will provide a
rationale for this dissertation study by looking at the history of language in Kenyan
education, and exploring the current place of African languages in Kenyan schools. I will
then provide a definition of key terms used throughout this dissertation, including a
definition of terms specific to the Kenyan context that might not be familiar to an
outsider audience. This study will be significant in providing a fresh perspective to the
research on language in Kenyan education by exploring the experiences of Kenyan
teachers, which while often overlooked in the research, are central to the conversations
on language in Kenyan education. This is significant because Kenyan teachers are the
ones often charged with enforcing the English-only policy in Kenyan schools, even
though the teachers themselves, as will be seen in this study, see the value in embracing
African languages even as they teach in English. Further, this dissertation study will ask
participants about their experiences with language and identity in the United States.
Adding this transnational layer to the study was a deliberate choice made in an effort to
see what meanings these Kenyan teachers made of their experiences with language and
identity in a context where issues of language, race, and power are more glaring (Lippi 1 Green, 2004), after having experienced some of the same issues in Kenya, a context
where the issues of language are not often immediately linked to race. Given the above
rationales, the choice to interview teachers pursuing graduate education was a logical one
for this study because these teachers are going to be future teacher educators, and they
will be positioned to disrupt the power structures that contribute to the suppression of
African languages in post-colonial African schools.
Historical Context of Kenyan Language Policies and Education
Current literature on language in post-colonial Africa highlights schools as some
of the major sites of linguistic oppression, and teachers as some of the main players in the
repression of African languages, given the power and authority that they possess as
educators (Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007; Maeda, 2009; Muthwii, 2004; Wa Thiong’o, 1986). In
Kenya, while some teachers support the language-in-education policy that allows for the
use of local African languages in the first three years of education, research shows that
implementing this policy is often a difficult task for teachers (Jones & Barkhuizen, 2011;
Jones, 2014; Nyaga & Anthonissen, 2012) due to a variety of reasons, including the
government’s lack of support in the form of resources such as material written in African
languages, diverse linguistic backgrounds among student populations, and the limited
amount of teachers equipped to teach in those languages. While there is no arguing that
there are challenges in implementing Kenya’s language-in-education policy, it is also
clear that Kenyan learners struggle with the English language (Onchera, 2013; Spernes,
2012), and there is need for educators to support student learning while drawing on their
home languages, which the students are often already conversant with (Xu, 2010).
2 In order to understand the language policy in Kenya, one needs to understand the
history of Kenya. Data from the 2009 Kenyan census puts the total population of Kenya
at 38 million (Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, 2009). There are over 85 different
ethnic communities in Kenya. However, some speak a common language, and therefore,
there are slightly over 45 different languages spoken by these communities in Kenya
(Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, 2009). After the passing of a new constitution in
Kenya in 2010, Kenya currently has one national language (Swahili) and two official
languages (English and Swahili). These languages are used in government institutions as
well as in education.
Kenya, like many other countries in Africa became a country in 1886 after the
Berlin conference that European colonialists used to define the boundaries of their
territories in Africa. Kenya was created as a British protectorate. The creation of the
country led to the grouping together of over forty-two different ethnic groups, each with
its own unique language and culture. The colonization of Kenya, and East Africa as a
region, had a profound effect on the languages spoken in the region (Nabea, 2009). The
spread of Swahili as a regional language can be directly attributed to language policies
that were enforced by the British colonialists (Nabea, 2009).
In 1909 the United Missionary Conference in Kenya adopted that local languages
to an area be used as the language of instruction for the first three years of education and
then Swahili for the next two years. English would then be introduced to students at that
point and used up to the university level (Nabea, 2009). Initially, the British colonists did
not intend to teach their colonial subjects English, as this would upset the superior
position that the British enjoyed, and lead the colonized to viewing themselves as equal
3 to the colonizers. The preference for Swahili was because as a Bantu language, it was
very similar to the many other Bantu languages in the region and was therefore easy to
pick up (Nabea, 2009). The Swahili language served as a language that could be used by
different ethnic communities and thus ease communication between the Kenyan workers
that tended the large farms and ranches that the British had seized from Kenyan
communities.
There were however various dialects of Swahili spoken across the Swahili coast
(The Swahili coast is the East African coastal area that stretches from Kismayu in
Somalia to South Tanzania and includes the islands Lamu, Mombasa, Zanzibar, Pemba,
Seychelles and the Comoros). The colonialists felt that there was a need to standardize
the Swahili that would be taught and spoken in the East Africa region (Kingei, 2001).
The East African Language committee was thus setup in 1930 to work on standardizing
Swahili, and the dialect of Swahili spoken in Zanzibar, known as Kiugunja, was chosen
as the basis of Standard Swahili (Kingei, 2001).
The British colonizers thought that teaching too many Africans the English
language would interfere with the master-servant setup they were trying to maintain. As
such, they put in place mechanisms to ensure that not many Africans got to advance to
the higher levels of education where English was the language of instructions (Kingei,
2001). Local languages and Swahili were maintained as the languages of instruction in
the African schools while the European schools were taught in English and the Asian
schools were taught in Hindi, Urdu and other languages from India (Kingei, 2001).
Segregation served as a way to keep a hierarchy of power with Europeans at the top of
the hierarchy and Africans at the bottom.
4 In the 1950s, the language policy in education shifted from teaching in local
languages and Swahili to teaching in English. This was brought about by the realization
that the policy of teaching in Swahili had brought about an increase in nationalism and
unity amongst the various ethnic communities in Kenya since it provided a common
language that they could communicate in (Nabea, 2009). The other intention of the policy
change was to bring about an elite class of African that was westernized and would look
after the interests of the British after independence (Kingei, 2001). As such Swahili was
dropped altogether from being taught with exception of areas where Swahili was the
ethnic language of the community.
After independence, the language policy remained the same for some time with
English maintaining its preferred status as the language of instruction for all the subjects.
This was in contrast to other countries such as Tanzania and Ethiopia, which maintained
the use of local languages as the languages of instruction in at least the primary level of
education. In Kenya, English was declared the official language for all government
institutions, including education. However, a 1964 survey by the Kenya Education
Commission showed that a majority of Kenyans preferred the use of both Swahili and
English as the languages of instruction in school (Kingei, 2001). However, Swahili
remained an optional subject until the Gacathi Commission of 1976, which recommended
that Swahili be taught as a compulsory subject (Nabea, 2009). The same Commission
recommended that English be the language of instruction at all levels of education. With
the advent of the 8-4-4 system of education (8 years of primary level, 4 years of
secondary, 4 years of university), Swahili was made a compulsory subject to be taught at
all levels of education. English became the language of instruction beginning in upper
5 primary school, while lower primary school (standard one to three) was taught in the
local mother tongue of a given area.
Kenyan youth, especially in urban areas, have over the last few decades come up
with a new, dynamic language that is referred to as Sheng’. Sheng’ is a dynamic language
that takes elements of different languages, including Swahili and English, as well as the
various ethnic languages that are spoken in Kenya, to form a kind of slang that is spoken
widely by urban youth, and increasingly by rural youth and older folk as well (Mazrui,
1995). The structure of sheng’ is primarily based on the structure of the Swahili language
(Osinde & Abdulaziz, 1997). However, it goes beyond code switching and introduces
new elements with its own grammatical rules and structures. Sheng’ emerged out of the
poorer districts of Nairobi. It came up as a way of communication that was practiced by
the urban youth who did not have great knowledge in either English or Swahili and were
trying to bridge the language divide of the various ethnic communities that live together
(Mazrui, 1995). Over the years, Sheng has grown in complexity and richness. The
vocabulary is much deeper and the language has spread beyond Nairobi to the other cities
and towns in Kenya. Businesses and the Media have also picked up Sheng, which they
use for advertising and in programs with a younger target audience. This language,
however, is generally discouraged in the school setting, and in some home settings as
well, as it is often associated with lower class inner city youth with a reputation for crime
and lack of academic ambition.
Understandably, neither teachers nor parents want their students or children
associated with crime or lack of academic ambition. But scapegoating language as
indicative of potential for academic and social failure is often misguided (Orwenjo,
6 2012). Understanding, celebrating, and drawing from students’ home languages in the
classroom, can have immense, and important benefits for students’ literacy learning
(Gibbons, 2009; Schmidt, Gangemi, Kelsey, LaBarbera, McKenzie, Melchior et al.,
2009). Teachers do not necessarily need to be able to speak the students’ home languages
in order to honor these languages in their instruction (Xu, 2010). Teachers can learn
about students’ languages and cultures, and use those to support their teaching in ways
that value the learners as individuals by valuing their linguistic and cultural backgrounds.
In order to develop and support language and literacy learning among English language
learners, it is important to view their other languages as capital that is an important part
of their literacy learning in English (Gibbons, 2009).
As established earlier on in this chapter, there are considerable challenges to
implementing the language-in-education policy, which allows for instruction in students’
mother tongues in early primary grades, in the Kenyan context. However, these
challenges are unfortunately not the only reasons some Kenyan teachers steer away from
African languages in their classrooms. Kenyan schools have a long history of
systematically repressing and undermining African languages (Campbell & Walsh, 2010;
Wa Thiong’o, 1986). This phenomenon is a remnant of the British colonization of Kenya,
which used education as a tool for the repression of African languages while promoting
English as the more desirable language in education and other settings. Through policies
that punished the use of African languages in schools, and sometimes even beyond
school, African people were taught to associate their vernacular languages with shame
and backwardness (Wa Thiong’o, 1986). Although Kenya officially got its independence
from Britain in 1963, colonialism and imperialism are a continuing reality not just for
7 Kenya, but also for other former colonies in Africa. Because of the continuing presence
of colonialism and imperialism in former colonies in Africa, many post-colonial scholars
are hesitant to use the term post-colonial in discussions of former colonies and formerly
colonized peoples. The argument is that there can be no “post” when there are still
systems in place that work to keep the colonized at the bottom of the world’s economic
and social hierarchy, while stripping them of their linguistic and cultural identities
(Moore-Gilbert, 1997).
Significance of Current Study
It is because of the power hierarchies and the suppression of African languages in
post-colonial Africa’s schools that this study is particularly important. While there are
numerous studies in the United States that highlight the importance of valuing student’s
home language, there are very few studies in Kenya (e.g. Muthwii, 2004; Orwenjo, 2012;
Spernes, 2012) that have taken on this important issue. These studies have undoubtedly
made important contributions to the research on language in Kenyan education, and with
this dissertation study, I aim to add to this conversation by adding a new perspective to
the conversation. A lot of previous studies have documented classroom practice and then
interviewed teachers and students about observed language practices. With this
dissertation, I interviewed teachers about the experiences that they had with language and
identity throughout their schooling, their teaching, and the experiences they are currently
having with the same. In asking teachers to recall and reflect on their experiences with
their multilingualism over their lifetime, this study aims to elicit perspectives that are
based not just on isolated classroom events but rather on the experiences and meanings
that these teachers have had across the lifespan.
8 The effects of colonization in Africa were such that Africans were colonized not
just physically, but mentally as well (Wa Thiong’o, 1986). This colonization of the mind
(Wa Thiong’o, 1986) sought to convince Africans of their own inferiority, and the
inferiority of their languages. As a result, African languages are afforded an inferior
position in Kenyan education. In fact, these languages are considered, not just inferior,
but wrong and punishable (Spernes, 2012; Wa Thiong’o, 1986). These negative attitudes
towards African languages, especially in schools, are widely prevalent, and are the reason
it is of extreme importance to understand the linguistic experiences of Kenyan
multilingual speakers, both in their time as students and as teachers in the Kenyan school
system.
My decision to conduct this study with Kenyan teachers was based on a void I
perceived in the scholarly literature on language in Kenyan education. This void was in
literature representing the experiences of African teachers charged with the responsibility
of teaching in English in post-colonial African settings where in an effort to promote
English, African languages are often undermined and suppressed. Kenya was a logical
choice given my background as a Kenyan English teacher, and also given that Kenya is
one of Britain’s former colonies, as are a lot of other African countries. Like other postcolonial African nations, Kenya has undergone similar (and by no means identical)
challenges in negotiating its multilingualism post independence. Kenya is therefore an
appropriate site for this dissertation study that will explore transnational Kenyan teachers
experiences with language and identity marginalization, given the history the country has
had with colonialism and multilingualism.
9 In addition to the Kenyan context, this dissertation study extends transnationally
to explore Kenyan teachers’ current experiences with language in the United States. As
such, this dissertation is a transnational study of the language and identity experiences of
Kenyan teachers who went to school, and also worked as teachers in Kenya, but are
currently pursuing graduate education in the United States. The decision to add a
transnational layer to this study was based on my desire to explore the meanings that they
made of their experiences with language in Kenya and then with their experiences in the
United States. I was interested in how their attitudes, thoughts, and ideologies about their
own multilingualism shifted or developed after moving from Kenya, where their African
languages were marginalized by other black Africans, to the U.S., where the politics of
language are heavily influenced by the politics of race, ethnicity, and nationality (LippiGreen, 2004). In Kenya, the hierarchy of languages and the suppression of African
languages is often attributed to social class (Jones & Barkhuizen, 2011). However,
theorists like Phillipson (1992), Said (1979), and Wa Thiong’o (1986) have argued that
the domination of colonial languages over other languages is a deliberate effort by
colonizers and dominant cultures to maintain the status quo that places them at the top of
the social, political, and economic hierarchy while keeping the suppressed populations at
the bottom. Given the complexity of the language situation in both Kenya as a postcolonial African nation, and the United States, as a dominant western nation, I was
interested in how the participants experienced their multilingualism in both contexts.
Given the socially constructed hierarchies of languages and cultures, multilingual
teachers in Africa and the United States often face the challenge of trying to overcome
feelings of insecurity about their African/African-American, or other minority identities
10 and languages (Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007; Soto & Kharem, 2006; Wa Thiong’o, 1986), as well
as insecurity about their competence in the use of the English language (Kitoko-Nsiku,
2007). This is a reality that is shared by bilingual and bicultural teachers in the U.S. who
struggle with doubts about their ability to teach a language whose ownership is ascribed
mainly to white Americans (Haddix, 2010), while their varieties are considered lesser
varieties of the English language. However, these teachers have important linguistic and
cultural capital that can be useful in their work as teachers.
Researchers argue that multilingual and multicultural teachers can model and
promote positive ethnic identity and positive self-perception among bilingual/bicultural
learners and as a result positively impact their school performance (Clark & Flores, 2001;
Weisman, 2001). In many post-colonial African countries, a majority of teachers are
bi/multilingual, as are most people in once-colonized African states. But the negative
attitudes towards native African languages conspire to make the instruction these teachers
provide continue the colonial agenda of stripping students of their African identities
(Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007; Wa Thiong’o, 1986). In the Kenyan context, this study is
significant because with the long history of suppression of African languages in Kenyan
schools, highlighting the language and identity experiences of Kenyan teachers incites
conversations about the place of students’ African languages in Kenyan classrooms. This
study presents an opportunity to investigate the ways teachers can continue to encourage
the learning of English without denigrating or devaluing students’ home languages.
In the U.S. context, this study is significant because with increasing migration
across contexts, there is a growing number of international and transnational students in
U.S. universities (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005), and it is
11 essential that universities recognize students’ multilingualism as assets in order to create
classroom and professional environments that value their contributions to the learning
process. Studies by Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, and Utsey (2005), Gatua
(2014), and Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell (2010) indicate that international students,
particularly from Africa, face unique challenges, including language issues, racism, and
feelings of isolation, while pursuing university education in the U.S. These studies found
that while those African international students came into the U.S. with a good mastery of
the English language, their accents were often stigmatized, and perceived as indicative of
ignorance and lack of intelligence.
These African students also suddenly become raced individuals, with their skin
color becoming a significant marker of their identity (Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell,
2010) where it had not been something they afforded much thought before coming to the
U.S. Because of the stigmatization of their languages and identities, some international
students from African countries experience feelings of loneliness and isolation (Gatua,
2014), which might prevent them from participating fully in their academic and
professional environments. This dissertation study will therefore be of significance in the
U.S. by highlighting the experiences of international Kenyan teachers in U.S. graduate
education, which will in turn illuminate the need for continuing dialogue on ways to go
beyond tolerating to actually celebrating the linguistic and cultural capital that this
population of students brings to their U.S. graduate programs.
In looking at both the Kenyan and the United States contexts, this dissertation
study adds to existing research by adding a transnational link to scholarly conversations
about language and power in Kenya and the United States. The transnational aspect of
12 this study distinguishes it from other studies conducted on similar topics and provides
another perspective that will be significant to both the Kenyan and the U.S. contexts in
the ways discussed above. As will be extensively discussed in chapter two, African
languages and identities are devalued and suppressed in the Kenyan context, often in
overt ways such as the caning and punishing of students for speaking African languages
(Wa Thiong’o, 1986), and in the U.S. context, often in covert ways such as the perception
of black international students as ignorant due to their accents (Gatua, 2014). This
dissertation study interviews the participants about their language and identity
experiences across the two contexts while examining the meanings that they made of
these experiences as multilingual students and teachers in both contexts.
Research Question
The research question that guided this study was: What are the post-colonial
language and identity experiences of transnational Kenyan teachers in graduate education
programs in the United States in the following domains: a) their primary and secondary
schooling in Kenya b) their teacher preparation in Kenya c) their teaching experiences in
Kenya; and d) their graduate education in the United States?
The four domains in the research question were informed by the main areas that I
felt language and education intersect. The first domain involves primary and secondary
schooling, which as will be seen in chapter two, is a major site of linguistic suppression
in post-colonial Africa (see for example Campbell & Walsh 2010; Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007;
Muthwii, 2004; Orwenjo, 2012). The second domain involves teacher preparation. This
domain was included because I wanted to find out what training the participants received
in their teacher preparation programs that prepared them to work with multilingual
13 learners in their classrooms. The third domain involves their experiences with language
and identity as teachers. Teachers are charged with the responsibility of teaching in
English and enforcing the English-only policy in Kenyan schools, and so I wanted to find
out what the participants’ experiences with this were. The fourth domain involves their
experiences with language and identity in the United States. This is the domain that
brings in the transnational aspect of this study, which as previously explained, was added
to find out what meanings the participants made of their experiences with language and
identity given their current situation of being black international students in the U.S.,
which is a context where the connections between language and race and more visible in
comparison to the Kenyan context. A more detailed rationale for the domains in the
research question is provided in chapter three.
Definition of Key Terms
In this section, I will introduce key terms that are used in this dissertation. To start
with, I will explain some of the main terms in the Kenyan education system that might
not be familiar to an outsider audience. I will then explain the terms post-colonial,
transnational, language and identity experiences, and hybridity, which are used
throughout this dissertation.
Terms specific to the Kenyan education system
This section provides a brief overview of the Kenyan education system while
defining key terms associated with this education system. The aim is to make this
dissertation more accessible to outsider audiences who might not be familiar with some
of the Kenya-specific terms used throughout the dissertation, and in the participants’
interviews.
14 In Kenya, two education systems have been implemented since the country gained
independence from British rule in 1963. From 1963 to 1984, Kenyan schools followed
the 7-4-2-3 (also referred to as the 763 system) system of education. This system
involved seven years of primary or elementary school, followed four years of ordinary
high school. After the first four years in secondary school, students would attend two
more year of advanced secondary education before proceeding to university for three
years to obtain an undergraduate degree.
As a carry over from colonial rule, students would sit for a qualifying exam at the
end of each stage of school. So after the first seven years, the students would sit for the
Certificate of Primary Education exams, whose results were used to determine the quality
of high school they would attend. The students would be ranked according to their
examination scores. The top students in each district would get an opportunity to attend
national high schools. Nation high schools were the best academic schools in the country.
The next best schools were the provincial schools that took the next best-achieved
students within the province where they were located. After provincial schools, there
were district schools that admitted the remaining qualified students within the district. At
the bottom of this hierarchy of schools were the 'Harambee' or village schools, which
were built from contributions from residents of the village within which they were
located.
After four years in high school, the students sat for their ordinary level Certificate
of Secondary Education exams. Those who attained the passing grade would then get an
opportunity to attend two years of Advanced level High school at the end of which they
15 would sit for their A-level examinations. Grades from these examinations would
determine entrance into a university.
This system of education eliminated a lot of students from having the opportunity
to advance through school as advancing to the next level required passing the
standardized exams at each level. The students who fell through the cracks would then
enter the job market with no tangible skills to prepare them for the world of work. It is
from this reality that reforms to the Kenyan education system where constituted. Reforms
from the Mackay Report of 1981 and Gacathii report of 1976 led to the introduction of
the 8-4-4 system of education. This system involved eight years of primary education
followed by four years of secondary education and four more years of university
education. The certification exams were retained for both the end of primary and
secondary education. Also retained was the ranking of high schools, and the placement of
students into those schools based on their scores from the primary certification exams.
The main aim of the reform was to introduce the teaching of vocational skills that
students could use to be employable in case they did not make it all the way through the
system. Table 1.1 below provides a summary of the key terms associated with the
Kenyan education system.
Table 1.1: Definition of key terms specific to the Kenyan education system
Term
Definition
763 System
The old system of education that involved:
•
Seven years of primary education
•
Six years of secondary education
16 (divided into four years of ordinary
level and two years advanced level)
•
O Levels
Three years of university
Ordinary Level. The first four years of
secondary education under the 763 system
A Levels
Advanced Level. The two years of
advanced level secondary education after
the O levels under the 763 system.
844 System
The new system of education in Kenya that
involves:
National School
•
Eight years of primary education
•
Four years of secondary education
•
Four years of university education
Category of secondary schools that are the
top academic public secondary schools in
the country. These schools admit the top
qualified students from all over the country
based on the Kenya Certificate of Primary
Education examinations.
Provincial School
Second ranking public secondary schools
after national schools. Category of the top
provincial public secondary schools that
17 admit the top students (with the exception
of those that qualified for national schools)
from all over the province.
District School
Third ranking public secondary schools.
Category of public secondary schools that
take students only within the district.
Local/village/ Harambee School
Category of schools that take students from
the local town or village. These schools are
usually financed by the local residents.
Primary School
Elementary school. Covers the first eight
years of education
Secondary School
Secondary school/ high school covers the
four years of post primary education
Standard/Class (followed by a number, 1-
Refers to Grade _ (1-8)
8)
Form (followed by a number, 1-4)
Refers to Grade _ (9-12)
KCPE
Kenya Certificate of Primary Education
A standardized examination that all
students in the 844 system of education sit
at the end of standard 8 (8th grade). This
exam determines the type of secondary
school that the student then proceeds to.
KCSE
Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education
18 A standardized examination that all
students in the 844 system of education sit
at the end of form 4 (12th grade). This exam
determines whether a student will get a
place at a public university or not. It also
often determines the type of program that a
student may pursue at the university.
Post-colonial
In this dissertation study, the term post-colonial is used to refer to the period in
time after the colonization of various nations, with a specific focus on Kenya. By using
the term post-colonial, I do not wish to imply that colonization of Kenya and other
African nations is entirely over. Many scholars have criticized the term “post-colonial” as
implying that colonialism is over when in fact it is not. Although the physical invasion of
various nations might technically be over, colonialism of some sort is always present in
some part of the world at any given time. European imperialism continues to plague
many parts of the world. Ramone (2011) argues that imperialism is ongoing and is fueled
by Orientalist discourse that works to create a hierarchy of races. One of the main
contributors to post-colonial theory, Edward Said, also voiced reservations about the term
post-colonial because he believes that colonialism is not over but lives on in the
“structures of dependency” (Said, 2002), such as foreign aid that is offered with strings
attached, that have been created by western nations to ensure the impoverishment and
continual dependency of former colonies on them.
19 While some scholars have argued that the term postcolonial is fluid and can mean
whatever one wants it to mean, critics argue that the use of the “post” is problematic
because it is immediately understood as an end to the inequalities between colonial and
colonizing nations (Parry, 2002). The former colonizers’ continued efforts in the
westernization of other peoples, and their interventions in former colonies have created
processes that work to keep the East subordinate to and dependent on the West (Ramone,
2011). While not an ideal term, scholars and theorists have reluctantly embraced “postcolonial” as a fitting term to describe the historical transition and the cultural location
(Parry, 2002) in between the colonization and independence of formerly colonized
nations.
Transnational
In this dissertation study, the term transnational is used in reference to the
immigration situation of my participants as I explore their language identity experiences
from across both the Kenyan and U.S. contexts. I refer to the teachers in my study as
“transnational” rather than immigrant because in addition to having strong ties in their
home country, they are in the U.S. on temporary student visas and have not necessarily
immigrated to the U.S. Transnationalism refers to the connections that migrants maintain
between their home countries and the countries they migrate to (Binaisa, 2013). Not all
migrants engage in transnationalism, and those that do may have different levels of
engagement with their countries of origin and their host countries for various reasons
(Binaisa, 2013; Song, 2011). All the participants in my study engage in transnationalism
as transnational scholars in various capacities. All of them have temporary student visas
that allow them to do their graduate studies in the U.S., but they all hold Kenyan
20 citizenship and have social, family, and in some cases, professional connections in
Kenya. Transnational migrants often engage in every day activities (such as the use of
their native languages, and other cultural practices) in an effort to maintain a connection
with their homeland and culture, and to display an allegiance and affiliation to their
cultural backgrounds (Binaisa, 2013).
Song (2011) looks at transnationalism from the language perspective as more
educational migrants engage in linguistic transnationalism, maintaining ties with their
native languages while, in some cases, aligning themselves with English (the language of
the host country), as English is viewed as a way to ensure that they or their children will
have access to global citizenship. However, it is important to note that transnational
migrants’ experiences are not homogenous, but rather, their experiences, ideologies,
goals, and levels of investment in their home and/or host countries differ from individual
to individual.
Language and identity experiences
In this dissertation study, language and identity experiences refer to the
participants’ experiences with the languages that they claim, and the ways these
participants responded to the ways that language was used in their lives. Language
experiences here refers to the encounters that participants had with the various languages,
dialects, and accents in their repertoire, and the ways that those languages were used, or
manifested themselves, in their personal lives, and their professional lives as teachers
charged with the responsibility of teaching in English.
The term identity as used in this dissertation is the fluid, continually changing
ways that individuals make sense of who they are (Bhabha, 2000) in relationship to their
21 surrounding, and how they express or enact these definitions of self. Identity is a major
part of post-colonial theories (Bhabha, 2000; Said, 1979; Spivak, 1994) as the theories
explore the identities of the colonizer and the colonized, and how those identities were
influenced, shifted, and changed by the colonial experience. Linguistic imperialism
theories (Phillipson, 1992) also explore identity in the ways that English language
imperialism impacts various other languages and cultures around the world.
Language and identity are very closely related because a person’s language
cannot be detached from his identity, or his sense of self (Delpit & Dowdy, 2002; Wa
Thiong’o, 1986). Therefore, in this dissertation, language and identity experiences are
considered jointly in looking at the encounters, events, and feelings that participants have
had with various languages.
Hybridity
In this dissertation study, the term hybridity is used to refer to the coming together
and co-existence of languages and identities in an individual. While some post-colonial
scholars and theorists such as Edward Said and Ngugi wa Thiong’o discuss identity in the
extremes of East vs. West, and one or the other, other post-colonial theorists and scholars
like Homi Bhabha and Chinua Achebe describe identity as being fluid, hybrid, and
constantly changing. According to Bhabha, there can be no claim to an authentic or a
pure identity since as a result of increasing globalization, migration, and intermarriages,
the confines of a fixed identity become blurred and identities become hybrid (Bhabha &
Comaroff, 2002). Bhabha argues for hybrid spaces where identities meet and co-exist.
Similarly, Achebe (2006b) notes that there is room for a co-existence of the English
language and African languages in Africans, and in African literature. While both Bhabha
22 and Achebe have received criticism for their advocacy for hybrid identities, both have
rebuffed these criticisms by insisting that hybridity does not mean selling out one’s native
identity or becoming an assimilationist. Rather, for Achebe (1994) for example, being
hybrid means that he can use the English language to express his African culture. Achebe
(2006b) has argued that he can push the boundaries of what counts as English by using
the English languages in ways that bring out his African voice, as opposed to trying to
imitate western ideals in the use of the English language.
In Homi Bhabha’s post-colonial theory work, the identity construction of the
colonizer and the colonized is characterized by ambivalence, a complex love/hate
relationship that is a mix of both attraction to the colonizer/colonized’s identity and a
repulsion to it (Andreotti, 2011). The colonized is repulsed by the domination of the
colonizer, but at the same time, he seeks to imitate his language and mannerisms.
Similarly, the colonizer is repulsed by the colonized and seeks to repress him, but at the
same time, he does not want to allow the colonized an identity so similar to his own that
his sense of superiority is threatened.
Ambivalence is closely related to hybridity, as both allow for an uneasy coming
together of opposing identities. Through hybridity, other ways of knowing, which would
otherwise be denied recognition within dominant discourses, are given a platform to add
to the conversations and challenge dominant ways of knowing (Andreotti, 2011). Bhabha
(2000) argues that there are no pure cultures or identities, but rather hybrid spaces where
cultures and identities meet and co-exist. This dissertation study is interested in hybridity
because all the participants in the study have experienced a coming together of languages
23 and cultures by virtue of coming from a multilingual post-colonial nation, and also by
virtue of being transnational scholars in the United States.
Overview of Chapters
This dissertation contains six chapters. Chapter one is an introductory chapter that
offers a rationale for the study, provides a historical background for the language
situation in Kenya, outlines a focus for the study and presents the research question,
defines the main terms used in the study, and provides an outline of the chapters. The
rationale section explains the decision to conduct this study with a focus on experiences
from two contexts (the Kenyan context and the United States context). While all
participants were in the United States at the time of the study, they all grew up and went
to primary and secondary schools in Kenya, and also trained as teachers in Kenya. The
section also offers a glimpse into how English became the official language in Kenya,
and Swahili became the national language (and was recently made an official language
alongside English). Chapter one lays the groundwork that allows for a better
understanding of what is to come in subsequent chapters.
Chapter two includes a review of related literature and a discussion of the
theoretical framework. The chapter reviews the literature on language and identity, first
in the context of post-colonial Africa, and then in the context of the United States. This is
followed by a review of the literature on globalization, and the hybrid identities of
multilingual individuals in both the African and the U.S. contexts. The literature review is
followed by a discussion of post-colonial theory, linguistic imperialism theory, and
theories of bilingualism as the theoretical frameworks that guided this study.
24 Chapter three starts off with an overview of qualitative interview as a research
methodology and a justification for why it is an appropriate research method to use for
this particular study. Next, I describe the procedures used to recruit and select
participants for the study, followed by a brief introduction of each of the ten participants.
I then describe the data collection process and the data analysis procedures that were used
in this study. Right after the description of the methods, I introduce myself and discuss
my own subjectivities as the researcher in this study before concluding with a brief recap
of the methods and procedures, as well as a brief reminder of the purpose of the study.
Chapters four and five present the findings from this study. In chapter four, I
present the theme of marginalization in both the Kenyan and the United States contexts.
The theme of marginalization manifested in participants’ experiences in both the Kenyan
and United States contexts as participants recounted experiences of being caned, forced
to conduct manual labor, and humiliated for speaking African languages in Kenyan
schools. In the United States context, the theme manifested in participants’ accounts of
being subjected to racist treatment as students and teaching assistants in university
classrooms in the U.S. Participants’ accents, their languages, and their nationalities were
stigmatized, and they were stereotyped in deficit ways because of their identities as black
African international students.
Chapter five presents the theme of (re)claiming African languages and identities
in both the Kenyan and the United States contexts. Participants (re)claimed their African
languages and identities as important assets in both their personal lives, and their
professional lives as teachers charged with the responsibility of teaching in English. They
did this despite the stigmatization of their African languages and identities in both the
25 Kenyan and U.S. contexts. In the Kenyan context, although the participants reported
being punished for speaking African languages in school, they often found ways to speak
those languages anyway, for example by hiding when they spoke their mother tongues, or
even by offering bribes to their peers when they were caught speaking these languages.
They expressed strong connections with the languages that they spoke, including English,
Swahili, and their African languages. Even while living in the United States, participants
were still strongly connected to their African languages and identities. The theme of
(re)claiming African languages and identities was experienced differently by different
participants, with some privileging their African languages, some embracing hybrid
identities, and yet others code-switching depending on the context. Participants worked to
navigate the various identities that came with being speakers of both English and African
languages, and in being in-between languages and cultures, they often did not fully fit in
with either language or either culture.
Chapter six starts off by briefly revisiting the study and summarizing what each
chapter offered. The chapter then presents the implications of the dissertation study for
research and practice first in the Kenyan context, and then in the United States context
while offering suggestions for working with multilingual learners in multilingual postcolonial settings, and for working with international students in U.S. universities. The
limitations of the study are discussed before finally, the chapter concludes by offering
directions for future research.
26 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter two reviews scholarly literature and theoretical frameworks that
demonstrate the relationship between language, race, and power in post-colonial African
nations and in the United States. The chapter also reviews scholarly literature that
highlights the ways that multilingual teachers have used their linguistic and cultural
identities as assets in their teaching lives.
The chapter will begin by reviewing the literature on language and identity in
post-colonial Africa’s schools, followed by literature on language and identity in the
United States, and literature on language and hybridity. This chapter will also discuss
post-colonial theories and linguistic imperialism theories, which are the theories that
inform this dissertation study.
There is a wealth of research on the effects of colonialism on black Africans’
linguistic and ethnic identities. Scholars and theorists like Chinua Achebe, Ngugi Wa
Thiong’o, Frantz Fanon, among others have written extensively about the colonial agenda
of stripping African peoples of their languages, cultures and identities that was
characteristic of not just the colonial era, but the present day as well. While colonization
can be argued to be technically over, its effects are still evident in the ways former
colonized societies view themselves and their languages (Wa Thiong’o, 1986). Wa
Thiong’o (1986) uses the term “colonized mind” to refer to the mentality remnant from
the colonial period that everything white and Western is superior to anything black and
African. Similarly, Phillipson’s (1992) theories of English Linguistic Imperialism explore
the domination of the English language, which often results in the suppression of other
27 languages in contexts where English is taking root. In pushing back against the deficit
mentalities that often surround bilingualism and bilingual individuals of color, other
theorists and scholars (e.g. Anzaldùa, 1987; Lippi-Green, 2004; Nieto, 2002; Reyes;
1992) have written extensively about bilingualism as capital, and as an asset that should
be celebrated.
These theories shape the literature review in this study. The framing of the
literature review is also informed by the research questions: What are the post-colonial
language and identity experiences of transnational Kenyan teachers in graduate education
programs in the United States in the following domains: a) their primary and secondary
schooling in Kenya b) their teacher preparation in Kenya c) their teaching experiences in
Kenya; and d) their graduate education in the United States?
As a result of globalization, teacher and scholar mobility across contexts, and
particularly the mobility of international scholars into US and other western universities,
is becoming more common (Seloni, 2012). In the U.S., there are a growing number of
black immigrants (Bryce-Laporte, 1972), and black international students from Africa
(Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; WamwaraMbugua & Cornwell, 2010). These groups face unique challenges in the U.S., including
racism, as well as language and cultural struggles ((Bryce-Laporte, 1972; Constantine,
Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; Wamwara-Mbugua &
Cornwell, 2010). However, despite the linguistic, cultural, and other challenges that they
face in the U.S., linguistically and culturally diverse international students bring to U.S.
universities a wealth of linguistic, cultural, and professional capital (Ma, 2014; Seloni,
28 2012; Zheng, 2014) that though an important aspect of their personal and professional
identities, is not always embraced in US educational institutions.
While my research focuses on Kenyan teachers in the United States, I will also
draw from some research on the identity construction experiences of African-American
and other linguistic minority teacher groups in U.S. schools and universities. This is in
part because there is not enough literature on black immigrant, or transnational, teachers’
language identities, but also largely because both groups face a lot of similar
marginalization in the U.S. I do not wish to imply that the experiences of black
transnational teachers are the same as those of African American or other minority
teachers. There can be no monolithic identity ascribed to all teachers of color in the U.S.
or Africa. However, Bryce-Laporte (1972) and Ogbu (1992) note that while there is a lot
of divisive politics among African-American black people and African-born black
immigrants to the U.S., (such as the idea that immigrant blacks have a higher potential for
upward mobility in the U.S.), both groups are often subjected to racist treatment in the
U.S., and as such, there is need for solidarity and collaboration among such groups in
their common fight against inequality and injustices in US schools and universities.
Gibson & Ogbu (1991) and Ogbu (1992) point out that immigrant minorities (those,
including immigrant Africans, who come to the United States on their own free will)
coming into the U.S. are more likely to see the U.S. as a land of opportunities, and as a
place that holds potential for improvement of their lives, while nonimmigrant minorities
(those, including African Americans, who were brought to the United States against their
will) might not see it the same way because while the immigrant Africans are coming
into the U.S. without necessarily having an oppressive history with the country, African
29 Americans have had to endure systemic racism in the U.S. their whole lives. However,
there can be a bridge between the two groups, because once immigrant and transnational
Africans arrive in the U.S., the color of their skin becomes a mark of identity for them,
and as such, they receive similar treatment to African Americans in the U.S. In my
review of the literature, I will seek to acknowledge the common struggles that both
groups face by making connections between research on the language and identity
experiences of African American and other marginalized teacher groups in the U.S., and
those of black, African-born transnational teachers.
I will start this literature review by discussing the works of two African literary
scholars, Ngugi wa Thiong’o and Chinua Achebe, both of whom write extensively about
their own language and identity experiences as post-colonial Africans. Both Wa Thiong’o
and Achebe are literary authors considered the pioneering fathers of African literature.
Both authors have also contributed to scholarship on post-colonial theory, especially as it
relates to language and identity.
In addition to work by Chinua Achebe and Ngugi Wa Thiong’o, I will also review
empirical studies on language and identity, first in the context of post-colonial Africa,
and then in the United States context. In concluding this section of chapter two, I will
recap the main arguments from the literature review and state how my study fits into the
pool of studies discussed throughout the literature review. A discussion of the theoretical
frameworks will then follow.
The body of scholarly literature and theoretical frameworks in this chapter all
work together to inform this study by revealing what we already know about the topic of
study and where the holes are in the literature. My study fits into this literature by using
30 the information we already have from the studies as a springboard to exploring the issues
from a different perspective. Specifically, the current study explored how multilingual
Kenyan teachers recall and reflect on their experiences with language identity over the
course of their lifetime, and how those experiences influenced their lives as students and
as teachers in both the Kenyan and the U.S. contexts. As will be discussed in chapter
three, the theoretical frameworks also informed the design and procedures of this study.
Language and Identity in Post-colonial Africa
This section will highlight two major approaches to language and identity in postcolonial African nations, one being the one most visibly represented by Wa Thiong’o
(1986) that privileges African languages and identities while shunning English and
western identities as colonial, and the other being that most visibly represented by
Achebe (1994) that embraces the hybridity of African languages and English. My
decision to include a discussion of these two scholars’ work on language in post-colonial
Africa is based on the strong connections between their work and their own experiences
with language and identity as Africans. As a literacy scholar with a creative writing
background, I am intrigued by the connections that both authors make between their
ideological stances, their personal experiences, and their literary works. This is especially
of interest in this dissertation study because this study puts a heavy emphasis on
participants’ personal experiences, and their personal ideologies concerning their
experiences with language and identity in both the Kenyan and U.S. contexts. Looking at
these scholars’ arguments will provide a way to understand some of the experiences that
the participants recount in the findings chapters.
31 The language debate in African literature has involved a lot of insights on
colonization and the effects that it had on Africans’ perceptions of themselves. Ngugi wa
Thiong’o’s book, Decolonizing The Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature
has made important contributions to our understanding of how imperialism and
colonialism work to suppress groups of people, along with their languages and cultures,
in an effort to maintain the power and privilege that certain groups enjoy. On the other
side of the debate is Chinua Achebe, who has contributed to scholarship on language and
identity in post-colonial Africa by arguing that it is possible for Africans to adopt hybrid
language identities without losing their souls to the colonial agenda.
Ngugi wa Thiong’o, a Kenyan writer and scholar, has made important
contributions to post-colonial studies, particularly regarding language and identity. His
work argues for the survival of African Languages and against the imperialist domination
of English globally. Using African languages is part of African peoples’ struggle against
imperialism (Wa Thiong’o, 1986). While other scholars like Chinua Achebe have argued
that one can use English that draws from African languages to express their culture, and
as such get the best of both worlds, Wa Thiong’o (1994) refutes this claim and instead
wonders why it shouldn’t be the other way around. Why, he asks, shouldn’t we, as
Africans, take from other people’s languages to enrich our own? Why should we claim
other people’s languages while being so reluctant to claim and enrich our own? (Wa
Thiongo, 1994).
Wa Thiong’o went to school during the colonial times in Kenya and experienced
the “monto”, varied objects that some schools in Kenya (still) used to humiliate those
students who speak African languages in school. Being caught speaking Gikuyu in school
32 was a humiliating experience as one would be physically beaten or publicly humiliated
by being made to wear a “monto” around their neck with demeaning inscriptions (Wa
Thiong’o, 1986). On the other hand, achievement in English was highly applauded as
English was considered the language of upward mobility. The education system was, and
continues to be, set up so that upward movement is by method of elimination. The
examinations one has to pass to move up are all in English, except for Swahili language
examinations. So if one does not master the English language, they are eliminated, and
thus excluded from progressing on to the next level of education. To be successful in the
Kenyan education system therefore, one has to master and be literate in the English
language. In an effort to achieve this, some parents underemphasize African languages in
the home in order to push for English (Campbell& Walsh, 2010; Jones & Barkhuizen,
2011; Tembe & Norton, 2008; Wa Thiongo, 1994) observes that the language politics in
former colonies in Africa work to push us “further and further from ourselves to other
selves, from our world to other worlds” (p. 439).
In addition to controlling the wealth of their colonies in Africa by use of military
force, the colonialists also strategically managed to control their minds through control of
their languages and their culture (Wa Thiong’o, 1994). Wa Thiong’o, (1994) argues that
this mind control destabilized the African’s perception of himself. He was taught that
everything about him was inferior and backward while everything about the white man
was superior and as such, desirable. “To control a people’s culture (and language) is to
control their tools of self-definition in relationship to others” (Wa Thiong’o, 1994,
p.442). The colonialists were able to gain this mental control by suppressing African
languages and defining them as lacking, needing improvement and generally primitive.
33 Wa Thiong’o cites schools in African countries that focus on teaching English and
preparing students for entry into elite European or American universities. Such schools
often hire white European or American teachers even though there are qualified local
teachers that can teach English. The implication then becomes that the local teachers
“might lower the standards, or rather, the purity of the English language” (Wa Thiong’o,
1994, p. 444). The white teachers are viewed as being not only the owners of the English
language, but as more fitting images for the elitist nature of such schools in Africa.
Wa Thiong’o’s stance on the language debate is that Africans, including African
writers and intellectuals, should not only speak but also write in their African languages.
He rejects the notion that English makes it easier to reach a wider audience and instead
argues that English rose to such a global status by means of oppression and colonization
of other nations. African languages, such as Kiswahili, should be credible candidates for
global language status as well (Wa Thiong’o, 1993). The promotion of English as a
global language by Western countries, and the subsequent desire of speakers of other
language for English mastery have more to do with power than the language itself (Wa
Thiong’o, 1993). Wa Thiong’o argues that Westerners use language as a tool to keep
dominating other nations while suppressing the languages, cultures and identity of those
nations.
Furthermore, according to Wa Thiong’o (1994), even when Africans learn the
English language, their variety of English is often not accepted by the “owners” of the
language. His response to scholars like Achebe that argue that English can be
transformed to meet the cultural needs of Africans is to ask, “after all the literary
gymnastics of preying on our languages to add life and vigour to English and other
34 foreign languages, would the result be accepted as good English or good French? Will the
owner of the language criticize our usage?” (Wa Thiong’o, 1994, p. 436). The two
literary scholars are both revered in African literature for their works that capture the
African spirit in marvelous ways, but on the language issue, they are on opposite sides of
the debate with Wa Thiong’o advocating for the rejection of English and other imperialist
languages, and Achebe advancing the need for African to embrace hybrid language
identities as speakers of multiple languages, including English.
Chinua Achebe’s contribution to the language debate is focused on hybridity and
the embracing of both African and Western languages. Contrary to Wa Thiong’o’s
advocacy for writing purely in African languages, Chinua Achebe argues that a more
realistic stance would be to value English for its ability to make communication possible
among people from different ethnic backgrounds, while also valuing African languages
(Achebe, 2006b). Having felt the pull of both English (and other things that came with
the language, such as education) and Igbo (his native language), Achebe established a
connection with both worlds and used both to create an identity that fit his needs as an
African writer and intellectual.
Achebe describes his classic novel Things Fall Apart as an atonement with his
past, and as his return home as a prodigal son (Achebe, 2006a). Things Fall Apart
(Achebe, 1958) tells the story of Okonkwo, an extraordinary African man that despite
having had a lazy and cowardly father, establishes himself in his community as a warrior,
a respected clansman, among other admirable things. Okonkwo is however unlucky in
many ways as he kills a boy who called him father, accidentally kills a fellow clansman
and is forced to go into exile. When Okonkwo returns to his village, the white man has
35 invaded their clans. Okonkwo is ready for war against the white man as he demonstrates
when he kills one of the court messengers with a machete. But when his fellow villagers
allow the other court messengers to get away, he realizes that the rest of the clansmen are
not ready to go to war, and he hangs himself. The novel is written in English, but it
contains the richness of African languages and culture in every sentence.
Achebe acknowledges that English came to Africa as part of a package that
included the evils of colonialism, but he argues that that is not reason enough to reject a
language that he feels serves an important role in African literature, and Africa in general
(Achebe, 1973). He argues that it is important though for an African writer to maintain
the voice of his own Africanness, his own experiences, since the aim in using English
should not be to use it like a native speaker, but to make it serve one’s particular voice
and culture (Achebe, 1994).
Achebe (2006b) argues that what’s to blame for the difficulties African languages
are experiencing with the threat of English is not imperialism but the fact that Africa is
experiencing increasing linguistic plurality as a result of internal migrations that have
seen communities and ethnicities mix to the extent that using African languages in
schools and other such spaces becomes difficult.
With the rise of African writers like Chinua Achebe and Ngugi Wa Thiong’o,
among others, there has also been a shift in how Africans are represented in literature. As
discussed earlier, colonial literature “worked to maintain imperialist ideology by
implying that colonized subjects were not fit to govern their own societies because they
were infantile and undisciplined” (Ramone, 2011, p. 32). Achebe relates an incident
when he was at the university and a novel by Joyce Cary, Mister Johnson, was presented
36 to them as being the best novel ever written about Africa (Ramone, 2011). This novel had
portrayed the African as primitive, inhuman and barbaric. As can be expected, Achebe
and other African students at the university protested this representation and as a
response to his experiences with such texts at the university, Achebe wrote the novel
Things Fall Apart, which rewrote the African experience as complex, as opposed to the
European discourse about Africa that portrayed African communities as “inferior and
lacking” (Ramone, 2011, p. 33). While scholars like Achebe provide positive
representations of African languages, cultures, and the African experience in their work,
there is still more work to be done, and the decolonization of the mind (Wa Thiong’o,
1986) is a process that requires deep reflection on the political, cultural, and social
discourses that shape our understanding of our experiences, and ourselves. This is yet
another reason why this study is so important. The experiences of African teachers in
post-colonial settings where English is the language of instruction are vital to the
conversation surrounding language and power. Teachers’ reflections on their personal
experiences with language and teachers may open up conversations that will disrupt the
structures of power that stand in the way of the decolonization of our minds (Wa
Thiong’o, 1986).
Language and schooling in post-colonial Africa
In this section, I review literature on language and identity in post-colonial Africa,
with a specific focus on language and schooling. The purpose of focusing on schooling is
that, as previously established, school is one of the major sites of linguistic suppression in
post-colonial African nations (Muthwii, 2004; Maeda, 2009; Wa Thiong’o, 1986).
37 Given that in African countries such as Kenya, most people are bi/multilingual, it
would be easy to assume that there is a peaceful co-existence of the many languages
spoken in the country. However, as will be discussed below, studies indicate that in
Kenyan and other post-colonial African schools, there are tensions between English and
the African languages that are some students’ home languages.
Tembe and Norton (2008), Jones and Barkhuizen (2011), Campbell and Walsh
2010, and Kitoko-Nsiku (2007) carried out studies in Uganda, Kenya, and Mozambique
on language practices in the countries and found that while parents, students and
communities thought that a strong cultural and language identity was important, they
nonetheless felt that being able to participate successfully in a more globalized world was
more important since this would pull their children up socially and economically. In these
studies, there is a clear hierarchy of languages for the participants and they want schools
to focus on the language at the top of this hierarchy, English. Norton and Toohey (2011)
have done extensive work on “imagined communities” and “imagined identities” (p.
415) in second language acquisition studies. They argue that these imagined communities
and identities act as a driving force for learners and parents who want their children to be
able to participate in desired communities and identities in order to have the opportunities
and privileges that being associated with those identities will afford them in the future.
The desire to claim those identities determines the amount of “investment” (Norton &
Toohey, 2011, p. 420) that the learner puts into the language that will afford them the
desired results.
The first example of this is Tembe and Norton’s (2008) study of community
responses to multilingual language policies in one rural and one urban school in Uganda.
38 Tembe and Norton (2008) found that in both settings, although the community
acknowledged the importance of local languages for their children’s identity
constructions, they considered mastery of the English language a higher priority because
it would afford their children better chances at upward mobility in a more globalized
world. The participants felt that it was not the schools’ responsibility to pass on local
languages and cultures, and cited the case of Tanzania’s struggling education system as a
case in point for why their schools should focus on English as opposed to local languages
such as Kiswahili or Luganda. Tembe and Norton (2008) argue that there is need to
educate communities on the pedagogical benefits of vernacular instruction, particularly
for younger learners.
A second example is Jones and Barkhuizen’s (2011) study of the language policy
implementation in a rural school in Kenya finds that even though the language policy
encourages the use of vernacular languages in lower primary classes, the reality on the
ground forces teachers to push Kiswahili and English. The parents wanted their children
to have strong cultural identity but were more concerned about their ability to participate
and succeed at the national and global level, which would require them to have strong
competencies in English. Another tension was that while the majority of the students had
a shared mother tongue, some of the children came from families where they had been
taught the local dialect of Kiswahili and very little of their mother tongue. So those
students did not comprehend when lessons were in the mother tongue, as also the other
students did not comprehend when the lessons were in Kiswahili. Teachers were
therefore left with the responsibility to make delicate decisions that will allow all students
39 to gain from their instruction. The exams were in English for all students even though the
policy allowed for instruction in the mother tongue.
A reflection of the shift in language use within the family and in schools in
Kenya can be seen in a study by Campbell and Walsh (2010) where it was evident that
parents are increasingly pushing for the English language even at home. Campbell and
Walsh’s (2010) study was of children in an elite English-medium school who were
largely from elitist backgrounds. While the children reported speaking English with their
parents, they also noted that they used Sheng’ with their friends, which includes a mix of
English, Kiswahili and other African languages. Outside the confines of formal
education, many learners in Kenya use informal languages such as Sheng’, Kiswahili, or
mother tongue languages.
However, it is important to examine the underlying power issues in the promotion
of English as the language of status and upward mobility. This highlighting of English is
often accompanied by a suppression of African languages. And when you suppress a
person’s language, you suppress the person too as a human being (Delpit & Dowdy,
2002). Kitoko-Nsiku (2007)’s study is an example of the dehumanization of African
people’s identities through the suppression of their languages. Soto and Kharem (2006)
refer to this dehumanization as “linguistic terrorism”, because in essence, it is a form of
terrorism to strip a people of their languages and their identities.
Kitoko-Nsiku (2007) explores the challenges of implementation of a bilingual
education system, which includes Bantu languages, in Mozambican schools. As a former
Portuguese colony, Mozambique faces a lot of the same language issues that former
colonies, including Kenya, which is a former British colony, face today. Mozambicans
40 were stripped of their native Bantu languages and taught to have negative attitudes
towards those languages as Portuguese was promoted to them as the language of
redemption from their native identities. Kitoko-Nsiku (2007) finds that one of the major
constrains to the bilingual education initiative in Mozambique is the colonial history of
language use in the country, whereby the colonialists convinced Mozambicans that their
languages were primitive and useless enough to be fit only for dogs. This mentality was
hard to break even after colonialism was long over. Teachers and communities had
internalized these “truths” about themselves and in order to be able to accept the
importance of bilingual education in Bantu languages, they had to unlearn all that they
had been taught about themselves for decades. This study further contributes to the
argument for the reeducation of African parents, teachers and communities on the
importance of native African languages and identities, even as they push for the English
language for their children and students. This reeducation would potentially emphasize
the idea that it is possible for languages to co-exist side by side without dominant
colonial languages having to attempt to suppress African languages out of existence.
Ethnic pride and positive attitudes towards native African languages and cultures is an
important part of the healing of the African soul from the wounds of colonization.
As the studies above show, there is a hierarchy of languages in Kenya, as well as
other African former colonies. However, it is worth noting that there are schools and
teachers who are willing to enforce the national language-in-education policy, which
recommends the use of students’ native African languages in the first three years of
schooling. However, there are various challenges to implementation of this policy in
Kenyan schools as illustrated by the studies discussed next.
41 Nyaga and Anthonissen’s (2012) study of the implementation of the language-ineducation policy in multilingual Kenyan classrooms found that there are difficulties in
implementing the policy that allows for instruction in the first three years of schooling to
be conducted in the students’ mother tongue, or the language of the school’s catchment
area (Kenya Institute of Education, 2002). These difficulties arise from various factors,
including that the government does not back this policy up with resources such a
materials for lower primary that are written in the mother tongue, which would be crucial
to making implementation of the policy plausible. Additionally, teachers are posted to
any part of the country upon completing their training, and as such, many teachers end up
teaching at an area where the language spoken is not one they can speak themselves.
Because of this, and also because of the varying multilingual situations among students in
different schools, teachers are forced to make their own interpretations of the policy
according to what works for their particular context.
Similarly, Jones (2014) conducted a qualitative study on the ideal versus the
reality of the implementation of the language of instruction at various class levels in a
Kenyan school in the western regions of the country. Unlike Nyaga and Anthonissen’s
(2012) study, which was conducted at various urban schools, Jones’ (2014) study was
conducted in a rural school where most of the teachers and students spoke the same
mother tongue. She found that although the teachers supported the national language
policy that advocates for the use of mother tongue as the medium of instruction during
the first three years, the reality of their practice was that they sought to move away from
the mother tongue as soon as possible, usually after the first year of schooling. However,
the teachers in this study recognized that students struggled to understand the English
42 language, and so code switching between the local mother tongue, Swahili, and English
was a prominent feature of classroom discourse (Jones, 2014). When a situation called
for it, teachers used either the local mother tongue of Kiswahili to explain concepts. In an
effort to adhere to the English-only ideal in upper classes though, teachers often only
sought one-word answers from students and did not provide opportunities for them to
speak during the lessons. While this practice ensured that only English was spoken in the
classroom, the teacher was doing most of the talking, and there was no way to guarantee
the students understood what was being taught to them (Jones, 2014).
Indeed the difficulty in oral communication among students in Kenyan schools is
echoed by Onchera (2013), whose study examined English teachers’ perceptions of
factors that affect the teaching of oral communication in secondary school English.
Onchera (2013) did a survey with the English teachers and the students at 35 secondary
schools in Kisii county, and the study findings indicated that most of the teaching in the
schools was by lecture method, and students were generally passive in the learning
process. English teachers did not provide enough opportunities in the classroom for
students to practice their oral communication skills.
In a qualitative study of primary school students’ experiences of being
multilingual, Spernes (2012) conducted focus groups with students in various primary
grades and discussed with them their uses of English, Swahili, and Nandi, the students’
mother tongue. The students were all very proud of their identity as speakers of the Nandi
language, but they all indicated that it was wrong to speak Nandi in school. They
supported the practice of teachers caning them for speaking Nandi in school even though
the teachers themselves spoke Nandi with each other in the staffroom. The students
43 argued that it was ok for teachers to speak Nandi because they did not have to sit for
exams. But as students, they understood that they had to speak English, and the teachers
had to cane them to get them to speak English. However, most of the students could not
speak more than a few words in English. Spernes (2012) asked the students to partner up
and tell each other a story in any language they chose. With reassurance that they had
permission from the head teacher to speak any language they wanted in the focus group,
the students all chose to tell their story in Nandi. They were then asked to tell the same
story to a different student but in a different language. There was less excitement and less
animation as the students retold their experiences in English or Swahili. Most of the
students ended up telling only a few sentences of the story, which was told in a more
animated, and more detailed way when they told it in Nandi. Confronted with this
observation, the students indicated that for them, Nandi was a private language and it was
good for telling experiences, but not for learning in school. Whenever they had to speak
Nandi in school, they had to hide and speak it in secret to avoid caning.
Speakers of marginalized or stigmatized languages often internalize the negative
discourses about their languages, and themselves, and begin to reproduce those
discourses in their own attitudes towards their native languages and towards themselves.
Schools and society continuously tell bi/multilingual students and parents that their
bi/multilingualism is a liability in their success. Often, the students believe it and as a
result, too often they give up on themselves or work hard to rid themselves of the
identities that hinder their success and acceptance in school and society.
As demonstrated in various studies discussed above, the politics of language in
schools is complicated. For both teachers and parents, it is a tradeoff where they have to
44 weigh what they believe will provide the best possible existence in a globalized world for
the learners, or for their children. The question though is, do we have to give ourselves
up, give up our languages, our cultures, our identities and as such, everything that
connects us to our roots in favor of white, western cultures and identities in order to move
up in society? After conducting this dissertation study, I want to argue that there is room
for African languages and identities in a world that is increasingly dominated by the
English language and western identities. Bi/multilingualism does not have to be
subtractive where learning the English language means giving up one’s other language(s)
and identities. In fact, bi/multilingualism and bi/multiculturalism afford one different
perspectives that can enrich their learning or teaching experiences and those of their
colleagues and students (Ma, 2014; Seloni, 2012; Zheng, 2014), and this is something
that is not always acknowledged in Kenyan schools.
Language and Identity in the United States
This section will review literature on linguistic minority students in U.S.
universities and linguistic minority teachers in the U.S. that demonstrates the relationship
between language, race, and power in education. Some of the studies will also
demonstrate the ways that these individuals resisted the marginalization of their
languages and identities. The literature reviewed in this section helped in the designing of
the interview protocol for the fourth interview, which I conducted with each participant in
this study. The fourth interview was based on the fourth domain in the research question,
which focused on the language and identity experiences of the participants in their
graduate education in the United States. For example, some of the literature in this
section indicated that international African students in the U.S. were often assumed to be
45 ignorant because of their accents. Based on these findings from the reviewed studies, I
asked my participants what their experiences were in their classrooms in the United
States. In this section therefore, I will present studies that highlight the experiences of
language minority students and teachers, including international African students in U.S.
universities.
Language is intrinsically tied to one’s identity (Anzaldùa, 1987) and how they
experience the world. In this section, I will present some studies that illustrate the
experiences of language minority students in U.S. universities, including experiences of
being silenced (Pailliotet, 1997), and choosing to be silent (Haddix, 2012), and
experiences of adapting to a new cultural environment where suddenly their blackness
and their accents become a source of tension in their interactions with students and
colleagues (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014;
Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010). Together, these studies illustrate the shared
experiences with language and identity among transnational African students in U.S.
universities, as well as other students of color in predominantly white universities.
Studies show that racially, linguistically and culturally non-dominant students in
U.S. universities often feel silenced in their courses. Haddix (2012), Pailliotet (1997), and
Shin (2011) carried out studies with pre-service teachers in different U.S. universities and
found that the voices of these teachers are often unheard, either by choice out of
frustration, or by the structures of how the teacher education programs are run. American
and other western universities are often largely focused on perpetuating white, western
ways of knowing through the kinds of knowledge that is valued and rewarded, and also
their choice of literature that is included in the curriculum (Seloni, 2012). The voices of
46 marginalized groups are not only neglected, but often also silenced.
Haddix’s (2012) study outlines the deliberate silence of linguistically nondominant students in teacher education programs that are predominantly white, Englishmonolingual. She notes that while these students have shared understandings with their
“sistas”, they often choose to be silent in their classes because they are tired of being the
only ones with the perspectives that they have, which are informed not just by theory but
by their daily realities. The pre-service teachers in Haddix’s (2012) study were African
American, but this is a feeling that black African-born immigrant teachers can identify
with as their realities are hardly represented in teacher education programs in the U.S.
When linguistically non-dominant students find themselves in classrooms where they are
often put in a position where they have to be the voice of all members of their community
group, and they have to constantly set records straight, defend their positions and so on, it
can be a thankless kind of endless teaching that is both exhausting and silencing. Norton
(2011) describes this kind of silence as a form of resistance where multilingual learners
resist negative identities that might be assigned to them in majority dominated contexts
by being silent. The role of teachers and teacher educators is to recognize what “identity
positions” (Norton, 2011, p. 429) silence certain students, and to work with them to
identify classroom practice that will ensure all students’ voices are valued in their
classrooms.
There are extensive studies in the TESOL field that highlight the negative
connotations of identity labels such as the native vs. non-native discourses, especially as
relates to language teachers. An example is Jordão (2009)’s study in Brazil that revealed
that learners, and sometimes teachers, of English in Brazil tend to prefer mainstream
47 varieties of English such as American English, as compared to other Englishes. This is
also true in the U.S. (see for example Shin, 2011) as non-mainstream varieties of the
English language are treated as inferior to mainstream (also labeled “standard”) English.
For Kenyans in the U.S., they are automatically categorized as non-native speakers of the
English language, because although Kenyans learn standard forms of British English,
they speak with a Kenyan accent, which makes their English non-mainstream.
Because of the stigma attached to non-mainstream varieties of English, speakers
of these varieties are often perceived as speaking inferior varieties of the language (Shin,
2011). Jordão (2009) argues that being a native speaker of a language does not
automatically make one a good teacher of that language, and that there is need to focus
on the ability of language (and English in particular) to “give voice to some and to silence
others” (p.99). English teacher education programs in the U.S., in particular, have a
predominantly middle-class, white, female population (Haddix, 2010) and as such
racially and linguistically diverse pre-service teachers are gravely underrepresented in
these programs. Those in the programs have to struggle with feelings of marginalization
and inadequacy because they are teaching a language that, as far as society is concerned,
is not their own (Haddix, 2010).
In addition to language, differences in culture can also be a silencing factor for
linguistically and culturally non-dominant students in teacher education programs. Both
Pailliotet (1997) and Shin (2011)’s studies illustrate this in different U.S. contexts.
Pailliotet’s study highlights the experiences of an Asian, language minority student in a
US teacher education program where she is faced with multiple hardships including
communication, feelings of isolation, prejudice, and even failing to meet the expectations
48 of her supervisor, who failed her based on one classroom observation and one fast-paced
conference. It is all too common for teachers and educators to overlook the unique
struggles that linguistic minority, and especially immigrant linguistic minority students
face, marking them as being deficit when n reality the issue could be one of
communication or cultural misunderstandings.
Closely related to Pailliotet (1997)’s study is Shin (2011)’s study of the identity
construction of non-native English-speaking students from East Asia in a TESOL
program in the U.S. Shin (2011) found that the participants’ cultural differences in
classroom practice, such as not talking a lot compared to their American classmates, were
constructed as being “inferior and disadvantageous as they were against Western norms”
(p. 158). Not only the English language, but Western cultures and practices are read to be
superior to other cultures. So when a learner does not speak English with native-like
fluency, and they do not speak as much as their Western peers do, they are read as deficit,
lacking, and sometimes even ignorant. The very same practice of not speaking much
would be encouraged, and rewarded in a different context.
Pailliotet (1997) and Shin (2011) argue that cultural differences in ways one
conducts themselves should be taken into account in teacher education programs. In some
cultures, speaking in front of one’s superiors is a sign of disrespect while in the U.S.
culture, being silent is read as lack of understanding or low intelligence. Like in the case
of Pailliotet (1997)’s participant, for immigrant language minority teachers, often
language and communication problems can lead to a lot of frustration and feelings of
inadequacy, sometimes so much so that they consider giving up the profession entirely.
49 As the studies by Haddix (2012), Pailliotet (1997), and Shin (2011) discussed
above illustrate, teacher education programs should not only listen and value the
contributions of bi/multilingual pre-service teachers but also create spaces for their
silenced voices to be heard. Current research on language minority groups has sought to
highlight and privilege the voices of members of these groups (see for example
Blackledge, 2006; Haddix, 2010; and Weisman, 2001) so that their marginalized voices
have an avenue to be heard and marginalized members of these groups have opportunities
to initiate change (Blackledge, 2006) that will ensure the wealth of linguistic, cultural,
and professional knowledge they bring to the classroom is acknowledged and valued.
While transnational Kenyan teachers in U.S. universities share some of the same
challenges faced by other teachers of color in the U.S., they also face unique difficulties
as international students. The following three studies (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel,
Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010) highlight
some experiences and challenges that Kenyan and other African international students in
U.S. universities undergo. A common theme among all three studies is that as
international students, the participants experienced racist treatment as well as language
difficulties in their roles as students and teachers.
Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey (2005) conducted a qualitative
study of the cultural adjustment experiences of twelve African international college
students, specifically from Kenya, Ghana, and Nigeria, and found that the participants
experienced various challenges in the U.S. Some of the challenges were that they
experienced prejudicial and discriminatory treatment from both white and black
Americans, as well as international students from other continents. For example, one
50 Nigerian woman recounted an incident where two of her new roommates at the dorm, one
from Taiwan, and the other from Japan, asked to be moved to a different room because
they did not want to room with an African. The participants in the study reported feeling
lonely and isolated from others. When faced with racism, the participants reported feeling
anger and frustration. While some participants took the time to try and educate the
offending party (like a participant who tried to argue with a white friend who claimed
whites were more intelligent than blacks), some participants ignored instances of racism
because, as one Kenyan woman noted, she did to have time to spend trying to make them
act right (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005).
Gatua’s (2014) narrative inquiry study examined the educational and
sociocultural experiences of seven Kenyan women who were pursuing or had recently
pursued advanced education in the U.S. The study found that participants dealt with
linguistic issues both as students and in their teaching. There was frustration when they
felt that they were expressing themselves correctly, and yet people did not understand
what they were saying. Some were often asked how long they had been in the U.S.
whenever they spoke. In their teaching, they worked to ensure that their students
understood their accents. For example, one participant reported that they slowed down
when speaking, and yet another reported that although it was exhausting, she would tell
her students upfront that if they did not understand her, they should let her know so she
could repeat herself or write down what she meant. The women in Gatua’s (2014) study
also narrated their struggles with negotiating two cultural contexts, especially in adjusting
to the U.S. environment.
51 In a study of Kenyan immigrants’ acculturation in the U.S., Wamwara-Mbugua &
Cornwell (2010) interviewed 30 Kenyans and found that while the participants came to
the U.S. having an excellent mastery of the English language, they quickly found out that
their accents marked them as ‘other’ (Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010). They had
previously not had a problem with their accents, but in the U.S., they were constantly
made aware of it by comments from Americans. The participants also reported feeling
frustrated by being considered “uniformed and unintelligent” (Wamwara-Mbugua &
Cornwell, 2010, p. 39) because of their accents. In addition to their accents, the
participants also came to realize that their skin color was also used as a marker that
determined how they were perceived in the U.S. While obviously they had been aware
that they were black before, their blackness had never been an issue for them before they
came to the U.S. But faced with the reality of being othered in the U.S., participants in
that study took different approaches to negotiate their realities of “living in between
cultures” (Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010, p.33). Some maintained their accents,
some changed their speaking behaviors depending on who they were talking to, while yet
others made conscious efforts to change their accents. One participant, for example,
voluntarily enrolled himself in a speech class in order to work on his accent because he
believed that in order to be taken seriously in the U.S., one has to “neutralize”
(Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010, p. 47) their accent.
Language and accent problems are some of the first challenges that international
students experience in the U.S. While some international students, like those coming
from Kenya where English is the language of instruction throughout most of their
schooling, might come to the U.S. believing that their language is good enough, once
52 they get here, they are quickly reminded that their language is in fact lacking in some
ways. In addition to constantly being reminded that they have an accent, they suddenly
become raced individuals, whereas the color of their skin had never been a prominent
mark of identity for them in the past.
The studies reviewed in this section provide a picture of the issues surrounding
language, race, and power in teaching and in universities in the United States for
language minority individuals, including international African students. These studies
helped guide the design of the current study, as previously explained, and provided an
entry point for this dissertation study to add on to this conversation. From these studies,
we know that international students from African nations experience challenges in their
classrooms due to the ways that their languages and accents are perceived by their
American peers and their students. What we don’t know, and what this dissertation aims
to find out, is how language and identity is experienced by transnational teachers across
contexts; in this case the Kenyan and United States contexts. Putting these two contexts
side by side will provide a more holistic picture of these teachers’ experiences, which
will then aid in our understanding of the meanings that they made of those experiences.
Language and Hybridity
In this section, I will discuss language and hybridity with reference to both the
Kenyan and the United States context. The decision to highlight hybridity in the literature
review was based on the fact that hybridity is one of the major tenets of post-colonial
theories, which guide this study, and it was also prominent in a lot of studies that I
reviewed as I was designing this dissertation study. Here, I want to present five studies by
Weisman (2001), Haddix (2010), Clark & Flores (2001), Maeda (2009), and Beynon,
53 Ilieva, Dichupa and Hirji (2003), which highlight the hybrid identities of bi/multilingual
teachers and pre-service teachers as they navigate their personal and professional lives.
The first study is a study by Weisman (2001), which explores the bilingual and
bicultural identities, and the language attitudes of four Latina bilingual teachers. The
participants in this study were four Latina women in their 20s with teaching experience
ranging from one to four years, who taught bilingual classrooms located in different
elementary classrooms within two separate school districts in the Southern California
area. While there is enormous pressure for bi/multilingual and bi/multicultural teachers to
conform to dominant ways of knowing, some of the participants in this study recognized
that it is important to understand the differences in language and cultures among students
and use what is familiar to the students to help them understand new content. For
example, two of the teacher participants noted that they recognized that Latino students
preferred working with others to achieve a common goal, and as such they engaged them
in cooperative learning groups or working with partners. One of these participants also
pointed out that she, like her students, switched back and forth between Spanish and
English, and that while everything about the school they were in taught the students that
Spanish was not a good thing, she wanted the students to be proud of their language.
These teachers expressed awareness that the school system’s prejudicial treatment of
bilingual students contributed to Latino students not doing well academically, and they
pointed to a need to challenge the negative images schools have of their bilingual
students.
Another study that demonstrates bilingual and bicultural teachers’ use of their
bilingualism to make important connections with their bilingual/bicultural students is
54 Haddix (2010)’s study, which focuses on two pre-service teachers, both of whom were
speakers of a vernacular language in addition to speaking English. One of the participants
was an African American woman, and the other a Costa Rican woman. The study finds
that the pre-service teacher participants embrace a hybrid linguistic identity, working
with the linguistic capital that they have as speakers of other languages and dialects as
well as mainstream English in ways that are reaffirming for them, and for their students.
For example, one of the participants, an African American woman that was doing her
teaching practicum in a second grade classroom, noted that for her, speaking African
American Language was a way to show her allegiance to and to maintain her membership
in her African American social circles. She also used African American Language with
her students as a way to acknowledge their shared linguistic and cultural norms (Haddix,
2010) and as such, to connect with the students. Haddix (2010)’s study puts emphasis on
moving beyond the negative perceptions of bilingualism and biculturalism, to literate and
linguistic practices that embrace hybrid identities as assets in teachers’ personal and
professional repertoires.
The third study that makes important contributions to literature on hybrid
linguistic and cultural identities is one by Clark & Flores (2001). Clark and Flores’s
(2001) quantitative study was conducted with Latina students in a bilingual education
teacher preparation program at a university in South Texas. The study was aimed at
obtaining profiles of how these pre service teachers identified and defined themselves.
The findings from this study, which used a survey that consisted of questionnaires with
open-ended questions about who the subjects perceived themselves to be, indicated that
there was a strong association between ethnic identity and self-concept. Clark & Flores
55 (2001) argue that bilingual and bicultural teachers need to have a strong sense and
knowledge of their histories and cultures, as well as positive perceptions of their ethnicity
and language backgrounds, as this will translate to a higher self-esteem for them and
more feelings of competence as teachers as was demonstrated by their participants. This
further underscores the need for pre-service teacher education programs to emphasize the
value of the linguistic and cultural capital that bi/multilingual students bring to the
classroom as this will help to boost their perceptions of the value of not just their own
diversity, but that of their students as well. As several recent studies, including the ones
outlined here, emphasize, it is important for all teachers to be prepared with techniques to
foster positive ethnic self-perceptions among their bilingual/bicultural students, as this is
an important factor in their academic success.
In some Kenyan contexts, and especially in rural areas, learning and being rooted
in the native language and culture is not just a choice for some children, but a necessity of
life. In such contexts, while English is viewed as a “way out” or the means to a better life,
the native language still remains the language of every day survival and interaction with
one’s immediate community. Maeda (2009)’s study of a rural secondary school in Kenya
finds that while students acknowledge the value of and participate in western education
and learning the English language, they also maintain strong ties and actively participate
in their native languages and cultures because they are aware that for as long as they live
in the village, they have to learn important cultural knowledge such as farming as well as
the local language. Maeda (2009) borrows Giroux’s use of the term “border pedagogy”
(p. 341) to describe the schools’ participation in encouraging a hybrid identity for their
students, and also coins the term “border-crossers” (p. 341) to describe the shifting
56 identities of the students between traditional African languages and cultures, and western
languages and culture. This study illustrates a practical way for teachers to foster ethnic
pride in their learners. By acknowledging, and celebrating the fact that students have
identities beyond the western identity that schools try to instill, teachers give their
students permission to be proud of who they are, and the languages that they speak. As
Godley, Sweetland, Wheeler, Minnici, and Carpenter (2006) note, learners are more
likely to be interested in school and learning when they feel that they, including their
languages and cultures, are valued as people.
The need for a positive ethnic perception both by self and by others, like teachers
and employers, extends to bilingual teachers in other multilingual settings. Beynon et
al.’s (2003) study takes an interesting look at how teachers of Punjabi and Chinese
ancestry construct their ethnic linguistic identities both in their personal and professional
lives. One of their findings was that these bilingual teachers were more likely to claim
their bilingual identity in seeking employment if they believed that the employer would
view their bilingualism as an asset rather than a liability. As is the case with students,
teachers also often face stigma based on their linguistic and cultural backgrounds.
Though in Beynon et al.’s (2003) study, being a full bilingual literate in both one’s native
language and English was often a positive thing, in some instances, as we have discussed
in TESOL and other English related fields, bilingualism often means being a non-native
speaker of English, and that is often a point of stigma and doubts about one’s ability to
teach English.
Beynon et al. (2003) also explore the complexities of bilingualism in terms of
who is considered a full bilingual and what effect that has on their willingness to
57 represent themselves as being bilingual. For example, one can be fluent in the
conversational aspect of their native language but not the literate (reading and writing)
aspects, and as such have reservations about representing themselves professionally (and
sometimes even personally) as speakers of those languages due to feelings of
incompetence. This is an important aspect of the work I am doing because a lot of
Kenyan, and other African, teachers face the same dilemma. Kitoko-Nsiku (2007)
reported the same phenomenon among Mozambican teachers. Because native African
languages are more often passed down orally than taught in school, teachers might be
able to speak the languages but not read and write in it. And also because of the emphasis
on English and Kiswahili in Kenyan schools, Kenyan multi-linguals find themselves in
situations where they know a number of languages but do not have native-like command
of any one of those languages. In their exploration of this aspect of bilingualism, Beynon
et al. (2003) argue that it is important to value bilingualism in its many forms, including
bilingualism that might not extend to the literate practices of reading and writing in a
particular native language.
Research shows that transnational scholars bring with them a wealth of capital
that they can use to challenge the domination of mainstream ways of knowing in the
American classroom (Seloni, 2012) and as such, add their voices and experiences to the
other voices and experiences that are more readily represented in curriculums.
Seloni (2012), himself a transnational scholar, conducted a case study of his own
(as a non-native English speaking international teacher) literate practices in a US college
classroom. He illustrates that the inclusion of texts from other parts of the world can help
students enter into more global conversations that help them see perspectives from other
58 people and places as well. Seloni (2012) argues that international faculty members in US
colleges need to use their varied cultural and linguistic backgrounds to bring in global
experiences to their American classrooms, for example in the form of multicultural texts.
While acknowledging the unique challenges that immigrant teachers face in the
American university classroom, Seloni (2012)’s work goes beyond the labels in native vs.
non-native politics to argue for discourses that recognize the value of the diverse
knowledge, and the linguistic and cultural capital that transnational teachers and scholars
bring to U.S. university classrooms. Rather than treating one’s non-American background
and the “non-native English speaker” label as a negative and conforming to feelings of
inferiority, immigrant teachers can use their wealth of knowledge to enrich the classroom
experiences of their students, opening them up to a world beyond their immediate
surrounding.
Conclusion
This literature review has looked at various studies from both the Kenyan and the
United States context that add to our understanding of the dynamics of language in
bi/multilingual contexts, including Kenya, which is a former British colony with a
multitude of African languages in addition to English and Swahili. Kenyan schools have
struggled with finding ways to deal with students’ home languages, and some of the ways
that schools have dealt with this (such as the punishing of these languages) have done
more harm than good to the students and their perceptions of themselves as multilingual
individuals. In the U.S., language and bilingualism continues to be an important subject
that scholars and researchers highlight in the literature. Bilingualism is often treated as a
deficit in American schools, and the same is also the case at universities where, as some
59 studies show, African international students are sometimes read as less intelligent due to
their accents and their use of the English language. Together, all these studies provide a
glimpse into what we currently know about the topic of this dissertation study. This
dissertation study will add on to this pool of knowledge by taking a transnational
approach that looks at the experiences of Kenyan teachers across both the Kenyan and
United States contexts. The teachers’ recounts of their experiences in the Kenyan context
will add on to the literature by providing a perspective that is largely missing from the
literature; that of the teachers. We will get to find out how these teachers experienced
language and identity as students, and also how they experienced the same as teachers
later on in their lives. This will be a fresh perspective that will allow us to understand
how these teachers felt about the implementation of English-only language policies in
their schooling years, and subsequently, what their thoughts and feelings were when they
were required, as teachers, to implement these policies. In the United States context,
exploring these same teachers’ experiences with language will further add on to the
literature by offering another layer to existing literature on the experiences of
international students in the U.S., which for the most part looks at their experiences in the
U.S. without going further back to find out how language and identity was experienced
by participants prior to coming to the United States. By looking at the teachers’
experiences over the course of their lifetime so far, this dissertation study will attempt to
explore the meanings that these teachers have made of their experiences across an
extended period of time. In the section that follows, I will discuss the theoretical
frameworks (post-colonial theories and linguistic imperialism theories), which guided
this study.
60 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
Post-colonial Theories
Post-colonial theories examine how knowledge about “other people” is produced
and the role of this knowledge production on the recreation and perpetuation of
inequalities in society (Moore-Gilbert, 1997). The major contributors to post-colonial
theories are Edward Said, Homi Bhabha and Gayatri Spivak. Edward Said’s contribution
focuses on the misrepresentations of the “other”, also referred to as the Orient, by the
West. He explores the West’s misrepresentations of the Orient and argues that these
misrepresentations are a way for the West to justify their colonial oppressions of Oriental
peoples. Homi Bhabha’s major contribution is based on the relationship between the
colonizer and the colonized. He develops the term “hybridity” and argues that there are
third spaces where cultures meet and co-exist in a single individual. Gayatri Spivak
writes about the problematic issues of voice and representation in colonial resistance. She
explores the questions of who gets to speak for whom, and as it the title of one of her
most popular articles, can the subaltern speak?
Other contributors to post-colonial theory include Frantz Fanon, whose major
works, Black Skin, White Masks and The Wretched of the Earth have made important
contributions to post-colonial thought, Ngugi Wa Thiong’o, Chinua Achebe, among
others.
Post-colonial theory also challenges the neutrality and objectivity of academia
since academia is for the most part a transmitter of Western thought and Western norms
and plays a role in constructing and circulating stereotypes and images of colonial
subjects that justify imperialist control (Moore-Gilbert, 1997). Imperial domination stems
61 from the idea that the inhabitants of the colony are a “primitive other” who require
control and improvement (Ramone, 2011). Said (1979) extensively explores this idea of
the West representing the Orient as a primitive, backward individual that needs civilizing.
Ramone (2011) adds that missionary work is also founded on the same principle of
needing to “improve” other people. This is commonly referred to as “enlightenment
humanism” (Moore-Gilbert, 1997) whereby a group of people feels like they are doing
other people a favor by civilizing them and saving them from their backwardness.
Post-colonial theorists and their contributions to the theory
Edward Said
Edwards Said’s contribution to post-colonial theory focuses on the
misrepresentation of the Other, or the Orient by the West. Said’s book, Orientalism, is
considered a pioneering text in the study of colonial discourses and meaning and issues of
marginality (Gandhi, 1998). Orientalism is defined as “the project of studying, teaching,
and writing-or simply producing knowledge- about the Orient” (Andreotti, 2011, p. 20).
It has also been defined as the representation of the East and Eastern people in western
discourse (Moore-Gilbert, 1997). Edward Said adds the definition of orientalism as “an
enormous system or inter-textual network of rules and procedures which regulate
anything that may be thought, written or imagined about the Orient” (Gandhi, 1998, p.
76).
An orientalist is defined as anyone who teaches, writes about or researches the
Orient. Ramone (2011) describes Said’s book Orientalism as an attempt to analyze the
vast body of work written about the East by the West in order to demonstrate that the
motivation for the West representing the East is to “enable Western domination and
62 restructuring of the Orient” (p. 83). The west deliberately misrepresents the East as being
inferior, backward and primitive in order to justify their control over those nations and
peoples. The West advances the notion that certain people require, or even beg for,
domination (Said, 1979) because those people are inferior and underdeveloped. The East
is represented in orientalist discourse as being “voiceless, sensual, female, despotic,
irrational and backward” (Moore-Gilbert, 1997, p. 39) while the West is represented as
being “masculine, democratic, rational, moral, dynamic and progressive” (p. 39).
This idea of the West being powerful and the East needing domination is
unfortunately often taken for granted as scientific truth (Said, 1979), even by the Orient
himself. Said argues that it is these discourses that fuel imperialism and colonialism.
Said stresses the relationship between knowledge and power. He argues that by
creating knowledge about the Orient that represents him as the inferior Other, the West is
able to maintain a superior position (Ahmad, 1994) that enables them to enjoy political,
economic and social advantages over the Orient.
Homi Bhabha
Homi Bhabha’s contribution focuses on the relationship between the colonizer
and the colonized. He argues that racism and other forms of oppression are not based on
stereotype of the Other, but rather on the construction of the self as being superior to the
other -Gilbert, 1997). In eliminating the possibility that the “Other” might be equal to
them, one justifies their control over that person. Bhabha argues that this objectification
of the other and the construction of self as superior are the foundations of the “civilizing
mission” and the idea of the “white man’s burden” in civilizing the “primitive” Orient
63 (Moore-Gilbert, 1997). The white man feel that it is his duty to “help” the Orient since he
does not view the Orient as his equal, but rather as an inferior being in need of salvation.
Homi Bhabha complicates the notion of hybridity and writes extensively about
migration, shifting borders and hybrid identities. According to Bhabha, culture is not
static, but rather is constantly changing. Culture and identity are dynamic, and hybrid,
and as such a multiplicity of cultures and identities can co-exist in a single individual.
Bhabha argues that migration makes it difficult to identify things like authenticity and
tradition. He argues that there are no fixed identities that can be imposed on either the
masters or the slaves since identity is unstable, dynamic, and fluid (Moore-Gilbert, 1997).
Bhabha writes about both the identity construction of the colonizer and the
colonized without separating the two. He argues that the colonizer also learns, grows, and
is changed by the colonial experience. While Bhabha has received a lot of criticism for
his arguments for hybridity, he maintains that hybridity does not entail giving in to
colonial discourses, but rather challenging them and finding third spaces for the coexisting of cultures and identities. Bhabha proposes a post-colonial strategy that ensures
there is no danger of power maintenance through a shift in vocabulary (Moore-Gilbert,
1997).
Bhabha argues against the “myth of authenticity” by noting that there is no “pure”
culture or “pure” identity and as such authenticity is an unattainable myth. Rather, he
argues that there are third spaces where cultures meet and co-exist in a form of hybridity
(Moore-Gilbert, 1997). Because of the constant mixing of cultures dies to the world
becoming more and more of a global village connected by technology and sophisticated
modes of transportation, individuals’ identities are often a mix of the various places
64 they’ve been to, the various people they have interacted with, and the various cultures
they have encountered and participated in.
Hybridity has been critiqued as a concept that was born out of colonial discourse
and could be another strategy for colonial control since it does not leave much room for
resistance (see for example Parry, 2002), but Homi Bhabha insists that hybridity does not
involve a meeting of the colonizer and the colonized without any tension. Rather, it
involves an uncomfortable coming together that challenges oppressive colonial authority
(Ramone, 2011). Parry, (2002) argues that emphasis on hybridity and postcolonial
thought that advocates for a reconciliation of the two sides (colonizer and colonized)
undermines the history of the colonial experience of economic and cultural oppression
and rejects the possibility for resistance while advocating for a consensus.
In a conversation with John Comaroff, Bhabha notes that colonized societies had
multiculturalism imposed on them and they had to find ways to survive and co-exist with
“otherness” (Bhabha & Comaroff, 2002, p. 23). Bhabha goes on to note that current
forms of nationalism are about claims to an “authentic” culture thought to be in danger of
being lost. Bhabha seems to believe that nationalism is born out of a fear that the
authenticity or the pureness of a people’s culture might be tainted by the presence of
other cultures such as Western cultures. Bhabha argues that culture is not pure in the first
place as it is constantly changing. The mixing and co-existence of cultures forced to be in
the same geographic space is inevitable. “For it is by living on the borderline of history
and language, on the limits of race and gender, that we are in a position to translate the
differences between them into a kind of solidarity” (Bhabha, 2000, p. 641).
Gayatri Spivak
65 Gayatri Spivak’s contribution to post-colonial theory focuses on issues of voice
and representation in colonial resistance. One of her most important works is the essay
Can the Subaltern Speak, which explores the issues surrounding the subaltern’s voice and
the postcolonial intellectual’s representation of the subaltern (Spivak, 1994). Spivak’s
explores questions of whether postcolonial work can only ethically be done within
colonial locations, and whether third world intellectuals in first world academies should
study third world culture (Gandhi, 1998), a question that I explore in my discussion of
my role as researcher in chapter three.
Some of the questions that Spivak and other scholars that are interested in the
issue of voice and representation ask include: does the subaltern speak in their own voice
or does he mimic the voice of the colonizer? Who can speak as other? Can intellectuals
speak as people whose groups they are not members of? (Fee, 2006). Spivak (1994) is
interested in the intellectual’s ethical responsibility toward the Other. The intellectual is
often in a position to represent the subaltern in research and other forums, and they have
an ethical responsibility to the people that they are seeking to represent.
Andreotti (2011) notes that often intellectuals think of themselves as the “saviors
of marginality” (pg. 41) as they study marginalized groups and represent them in the
academy. Often in their representations of the marginalized, they end up reproducing the
discourses that work to keep the marginalized at the margins while keeping dominant
groups at the top. Of course these intellectuals’ work is often aimed at putting an end to
the oppressive power structures, but as products and/or members of first world
academies, there is often the danger of reproducing these oppressive power structures in
their representations of the subaltern (Andreotti, 2011).
66 Upwardly mobile third world scholars often take part in the commodification of
culture, difference, and marginality (Andreotti, 2011; Moore-Gilbert, 1997). The
commodification, or what Gandhi (1998) calls “monumentalizing” (p.60) of marginality
is of interest to first world academies, who use third world intellectuals to produce
knowledge that further works to classify people and produce “exotic culture” (Gandhi,
1998, p. 60). Although they are part of the Orient, third world scholars in first world
academies are seen as operating in the colonizer’s academy within first world scholarship
and as such reproducing colonizing knowledge. However, Gandhi (1998) reiterates that it
is not very productive to be overly critical of academic activism and the important work
that postcolonial intellectuals in first world academies do, because the contributions of
these postcolonial intellectuals are invaluable in the creation and facilitation of
democratic dialogue between Western and non-Western academies.
Spivak (1994) also talks about the role of colonization in the subaltern’s
perception of himself. She argues that colonization worked to suppress pre-colonial
cultures through assimilation while pushing orientalist discourses of the West as more
civilized, and as such superior to other peoples. These orientalist discourses had the effect
of changing the subaltern’s image of himself and his reality and legitimizing the West’s
control and claim on cultural superiority over the “inferior” Other (Moore-Gilbert, 1997).
The colonizers were able to naturalize these discourses and convince the subaltern of
their own inferiority.
Spivak (1994) notes that colonialism and globalization had the effect of
impoverishing the third world and universalizing western interests in the rest of the
world. Even after colonization was technically over, the West continues to exploit the
67 third world economically and use the third world to create wealth for the first world
(Moore-Gilbert, 1997). Meanwhile, colonialism and its effect on former colonies is
brushed aside and ignored.
Frantz Fanon
Frantz Fanon’s most influential works include the books Black Skin, White Masks
and The Wretched of the Earth. Fanon talks about language in relation to culture and
notes that “to speak means… above all is to assume a culture, to support the weight of a
civilization” (Fanon, 1963, p. 17-18). Language ownership, speaking a particular
language means you take on some aspects of the identity associated with that language.
Like Thiong’o, Fanon asserts that to take on a language means to take on the
culture of that language as well. In Black Skin, White Masks, Fanon (1952) discusses the
Negro of the Antille who, having learned the language of the colonizer, the French
language, and having taken on the French culture, distances himself from his blackness
and his native language and begins to perceive himself as being white, or at least whiter
than the other black people who have not assimilated to the French as much as he has. By
distancing himself from those, he considers himself more civilized, more like the white
man. The Negro of the Antille renounces his blackness and takes on a white identity,
which he believes to be superior to his own blackness. As Fanon puts it:
Every colonized people- in other words, every people in whose soul an inferiority
complex has been created by the death and burial of its local cultural originalityfinds itself face to face with the language of the civilizing nation; that is with the
culture of the mother country. The colonized is elevated above his jungle status in
68 proportion to his adoption of the mother country’s cultural standards. He becomes
whiter as he renounces his blackness, his jungle (Fanon, 1952, p. 18).
Thiong’o (1994) posits that to rob a people of their culture is to rob them of their
tools for self-definition in relationship to other people. As Fanon (1952) observes in the
quote above, when people are colonized and their languages and cultures suppressed,
they may develop an inferiority complex due to the suppression and rejection of their
culture, and as a result, they may come to believe that the way out of their
“backwardness” is to assimilate to the colonizer and shed off as much of their black as
they can. Fanon (1952) goes on to note that “the negro of the Antilles will be
proportionately whiter- that is, he will come closer to being a real human being- in direct
ratio to his mastery of the French language” (Fanon, 1952, p. 18). In order to regain his
humanity, the Antillean Negro distances himself from Africans and sees himself as being
more European because of his grasp of the French language. Ramone (2011) reiterates
that although the Antillean’s skin is black and his physical characteristics look much like
those of other Africans, he adopts racial prejudices against blackness and distances
himself from it.
True to Edward Said’s argument about Orientalist discourses, the colonialists
managed to convince the colonized that their opinions were Truth and were eternal with
no possibility for human error (Fanon, 1963). As such, the colonized had no choice but to
believe them. This is not to say that all colonized populations, or all formerly colonized
Africans believe and succumb to these effects of colonization that Fanon (1963)
describes. Many formerly colonized peoples continually resist and push back against the
suppression of their languages and identities, and they refuse to believe the deficit
69 perceptions of themselves that they are constantly being pushed to believe as truth. Like
any other populations, Africans cannot all be lumped together as a homogeneous group
with the same experiences. There are nuances to the ways that different people within
groups respond to marginalization, including the major types of marginalization of
colonized populations’ languages and cultures that occurred as a result of the colonization
of Africa. In fact, many formerly colonized people came to the realization that the
colonizer was not better than them (Fanon, 1963). They then began to regain some of
their lost self-esteem. As Fanon (1963) puts it: “his (the colonizer’s) look can no longer
strike fear into me or nail me to the spot and his voice can no longer petrify me” (Fanon,
1963, p. 10).
However, even after independence, former colonies were forced to maintain
economic ties with colonial nations because the colonial regimes made it so that their
former colonies would have to depend on them economically or risk severe consequences
(Fanon, 1963). The colonialists were interested in their colonies’ natural resources, their
wealth and whatever they could get in order to advance themselves and their industries,
and when colonialism was over and they had to leave, they put systems in place to ensure
they would still be able to suck the resources out of their colonies without actually
physically colonizing them (Fanon, 1963). Similarly, in terms of language and identity, as
Wa Thiong’o (1986) notes, physical colonization is over but the colonized individual’s
mind is still coping with the effects of colonization. Africans still work to suppress their
own languages and identities, as was evident in the review of the literature above, while
glorifying Western languages and identities.
70 Post-colonial theory and issues of identity
A man is never more defeated than when he is running away from himself….
Africa has had such a fate in the world that the very adjective African can call up
hideous fears of rejection. Better then to cut all the links with this homeland, this
liability, and become in one giant leap the universal man (Achebe, 1973, p. 626627).
Issues of identity are prominent in post-colonial studies. Each of the contributors
to post-colonial theory touches on identity to some extent. In talking about Orientalism,
Said talks about the misrepresentation of the Orient and the identity forced on him by
these misrepresentations. Bhabha’s work on hybridity is all about the identity of the postcolonial individual that has to live with opposing cultures, languages, and as such,
identities. Spivak’s work on the post-colonial intellectual is also to some extent about
identity because she talks about the post-colonial intellectual’s ethical responsibility in
their representation of the subaltern’s voice, which is part of the subaltern’s identity. In
more obvious ways, Wa Thiong’o, Achebe, and Fanon’s work on language and culture
are about identity as well.
While most post-colonial scholars separate the identities of the colonizer and the
colonized into opposing binaries, Bhabha’s work tries to bring the two binaries closer
together by suggesting a co-existence of their identities and cultures. Gandhi (1998) notes
that there is a “postcolonial desire for extra- or post-national solidarities” (p. 123) and
therefore some scholars, like Bhabha for example, are trying to suggest alternatives to
anti-colonial nationalism by forwarding discourses of hybridity and ideas of mixed
cultures or global cultures.
71 However, Gandhi (1998) also observes that “celebrations of hybridity generally
refer to the destabilising of colonized culture. The West remains the privileged meeting
ground for all ostensibly cross-cultural conversations” (p. 136). Gandhi (1998) warns that
celebrations of ‘cultural diversity’ and ‘enlightened hybridity’ (p. 136) disguise
oppressive imperialism and the political and economic disparities that exist among
nations and cultures. By embracing hybridity, often the dominant culture (usually the
colonizer’s) consumes the marginalized culture and the colonizer succeeds in his quest to
suppress what he has all along labeled an inferior Other.
Despite his misgivings about the celebration of global cultures and identities,
Gandhi (1998) agrees with hybridity theorists that there is no “pure identity” of the
colonizer or the colonized, but rather that there is continuity between the two identities.
The colonizer is victimized and decivilized in his own oppression of the colonized, and
on the other hand, the colonized is a “sometimes-collaborator, sometimes-competitor” (p.
138) of the oppressive system. This is in line with Bhabha’s argument that both the
colonizer and the colonized are transformed by the colonial experience. The colonial
encounter led to a mutual transformation of both the colonizer and the colonized. It is
however important to confront the fact that colonization did have an effect on colonized
individuals’ perceptions of themselves and of their languages and cultures, and as such
there is need for continued conversations on ways the negative discourses concerning
Africans and other formerly colonized peoples and their languages can be broken down,
so that blackness and bi/multilingualism will no longer be seen as a deficit, but rather as
assets in the personal and professional identities of those that possess them.
72 Linguistic Imperialism Theories
This study was also framed by linguistic imperialism theories (Phillipson, 1992). I
was also guided by Anzaldùa’s (1987) work on linguistic terrorism and her work on
hybridity, as well as work by theorists and scholars in bilingualism, language, and
identity studies (e.g. Delpit, 2002; Lippi-Green, 2004; Moll, 2004; Nieto, 2002). Together
with post-colonial theory, which is discussed above, these theories provided a framework
for the study that looked at language within both the Kenyan and the U.S. contexts.
As a former British colony, Kenya has English as the language of instruction from
the fourth year of schooling onwards. Although the British encouraged the use of African
languages in the early years of schooling (unlike the French who totally ignored African
languages), these languages were delineated to a low status, while English was credited
the ability to civilize colonized populations (Phillipson, 1992). Over fifty years since
Kenya’s 1964 independence, English continues to be at the top of the linguistic hierarchy
while African languages stay at the bottom of the hierarchy. Phillipson (1992) refers to
this as a “legacy of linguicism in which the colonized people have internalized the
language and many of the attitudes of their masters, in particular their attitude to the
dominant language and the dominated languages” (p. 128). Phillipson (1992) continues to
argue that it is this linguicist legacy that forms the basis of neo-colonial imperialism. He
defines English linguistic imperialism as when “the dominance of English is asserted and
maintained by the establishment and continuous reconstitution of structural and cultural
inequalities between English and other languages.” (p. 47). Which the British are heavily
implicated in the domination of English in former British colonies, Phillipson (1992)
observes that America is joining forces with the British Council in an effort to make
73 English a “world language” (p. 133) while legitimizing this endeavor as being in the best
interest of both the national and international community. According to Phillipson
(2002), this endeavor is a contemporary version of the dominating powers’ desire to
civilize the dominated, otherwise known as the “white man’s burden” (p. 163). There is a
belief that in order to “help” developing nations, the dominant powers need to “civilize”
them, and that civilization involves putting an emphasis on English, often at the expense
of native languages.
The U.S. has not been spared either when it comes to the domination of English.
In the U.S., the tension is more on the dialects of English that various groups speak, and
on the accents when it comes to immigrants from various nations. Stubbs (2002) observes
that “[w]e hear language through a powerful filter of social values and stereotypes” (p.
66). Speakers of standard English are often perceived to be more intelligent, and more
confident as compared to those who speak other dialects of the English language, or those
who speak English with certain stigmatized accents (Delpit, 2002; Lippi-Green, 2004;
Stubbs, 2002). In a discussion of African American vernacular language and how it is
perceived in American schools and the American society, Delpit (2002) observes that the
language is a source of a lot of mixed emotions for African Americans, as it is a language
that is close to their hearts and souls, but at the same time, it is perceived by some as a
source of “collective disgrace” (Delpit, 2002, p. 35). Middle-class African Americans, or
those aspiring for the middle class worry about other people, specifically “the white folk”
(Delpit, 2002, p. 37) perceiving them as “ignorant and unworthy” (Delpit, 2002, p. 37)
because of their language. These worries are not unfounded because, as Delpit (2002)
illustrates with examples, language plays a big role in how one’s intelligence and
74 expertise is perceived even in the workplace. When one’s language deviates from
standard forms, and especially when it deviates towards a stigmatized form of the
language, then it becomes difficult for some to hear past the dialect or accent and access
the person’s intelligence and expertise (Delpit, 2002).
In his essay, Rethinking Resistance, Moll (2004) argues that it is important for
both teachers and students to disrupt race and class ideologies that are limiting to students
as these ideologies assign notions of deficit to black students and students from lowincome backgrounds. Teachers and students can practice and document
“counterexperiences” (Moll, 2004, p. 128) about their lives and schools in order to begin
the work of redefining their identities. As Moll (2004) asserts, “race and class ideologies
may always be “in the air,” as inescapable realities of life, but their most damaging
consequences are not inevitable, they can be mediated by purposeful alternative scripts.”
(p. 129). It is therefore important that resistance involves a redefinition of self, where
students as well as teachers produce counter narratives in the face of racism and
marginalization.
Nieto (2002) argues that children who do not speak English, but come to school
with different languages, cultures, and experiences, should not be treated as blank slates,
but as learners with a wealth of linguistic and cultural capital that can be useful in the
learning process. While students value their own languages and cultures, these are often
not acknowledged or valued in the schools (Nieto, 2002). However, when students feel
that who they are is not valued in the schools, they feel a disconnect with the school
environment. As Delpit (2002) aptly put it, “[s]ince language is one of the most intimate
expressions of identity, indeed, “the skin that we speak,” then to reject a person’s
75 language can only feel as if we are rejecting him.” (p. 47). Delpit (2002) suggests that in
order to help students to be willing to adopt standard forms of English, it is imperative
that teachers show love, care, and respect for not only the children, but also their
languages and cultures. Only when the children trust that their teachers perceive them
with care and respect will they be able to learn from the teachers.
Conclusion
In this chapter, I have presented a comprehensive literature review with a
discussion of what we currently know about language and identity in the post-colonial
Africa. I have also presented studies from the U.S. context, with a focus on African
international students’ experiences in U.S. universities, as well as the experiences of
other marginalized bilingual/bicultural groups such as African Americans and Latinos in
U.S. universities. In the Kenyan context (and other post-colonial African countries), the
studies showed that African languages are actively suppressed in schools, and that there
is often deficit discourses about these languages and their speakers. As a result of
colonization, Africans were taught to devalue their own languages, just like the
colonizers did, and so schools put a lot of effort into eradicating these languages while
assertively promoting the English language. The studies also indicated that parents are
also complicit in this dynamic because they believe that English is the language of
success and upward mobility, and African languages are an obstacle in the learning of
English, and so they insist on English for their children, both at home and at school.
On the other hand, some studies showed teachers successfully using African
languages in their classroom to support their students’ learning. In lower primary levels,
which goes from standard one to standard four, teachers in rural schools drew of the
76 literacies that their students already had in their African languages to support their
learning of English and content area subjects.
In the U.S. context, studies showed that African international students faced
linguistic and cultural challenges in their roles as students and teaching assistants in the
U.S. International students from Kenya reported struggling with language as they were
perceived to have accents, which were sometimes used to judge them as ignorant and
lacking in intelligence. The studies also showed that the African international students
experienced racism, and were often isolated from other groupings in the U.S. The African
international students maintained transnational ties with their families back in their home
countries, and sometimes this provided some relief from the challenges that they faced in
the U.S. Other studies conducted with African American and Latino pre service and inservice teachers indicated that the teachers enacted hybrid identities, and used their
hybridity and memberships in different discourse communities to support their students
in various ways.
The research and theories discussed in this chapter demonstrate that there can be a
merging of languages and cultures to create hybrid spaces where linguistic and cultural
differences are not viewed as disruptions, but rather as points of conversation and
dialogue where everyone’s contributions are welcome and valued (Gutiérrez, BaquedanoLopez, & Tejeda, 1999). In the Kenyan context, where there are multiple languages
pushing to co-exist whilst the politics of language, globalization, and power advance
English and suppress African languages, it is important for teachers, parents, and
communities to not lose sight of the benefits of a positive ethnic identity and selfperception (which includes positive attitudes towards native African languages and
77 cultures) for bi/multilingual learners. Studies like the ones carried out by Campbell and
Walsh (2009) and Campbell and Walsh (2010) show that despite the push for standard
English in Kenyan schools (which often includes the suppression of, and the punishing of
students for speaking in, African languages) students still value their native languages
and outside formal classroom settings, they shift seamlessly from one language to
another, and sometimes even mix three or more languages in a conversation to
demonstrate affiliation with different linguistic and cultural groups.
Examination of the literature and the theories above indicates that dominant
languages, like English, often accrue their power through the suppression of other
languages. The literature and the theories also indicate that deficit discourses about nondominant languages and their speakers are a hindrance to the educational success of the
students that speak those languages, because as Nieto (2002) asserts, teachers cannot
make meaningful connections, that will lead to academic success, with their students
unless they understand and respect the cultural and linguistic backgrounds of those
students. While there is a lot of research on language in the Kenyan context, there is a
clear underrepresentation of the personal experiences of both students and teachers with
regards to how they experience language and multilingualism in their lives. A lot of
studies are based on classroom observations and interviews on classroom practices. The
individual experiences of the students are the teachers are left underrepresented. This
dissertation study will endeavor to present the experiences of participants regarding their
experiences with language and identity both as students and as teachers in the Kenyan
context, as well as their experiences of their experiences as students and teaching
assistants in the United States. The aim of this dissertation is not to compare their
78 experiences in the two contexts, but rather to look at their experiences across contexts
with the aim of understanding what those experiences looked like in Kenya, and in the
U.S. As will be extensively discussed in chapter three, qualitative interview research
provides a powerful methodology for studying the personal experiences of individuals
because qualitative interviews allow a lot of room for people to tell of their experiences,
and build their own identities.
In Kenya, this study is significant because the suppression of African languages is
alarmingly common in Kenyan schools, and highlighting the experiences of Kenyan
teachers with language and identity will encourage the continuing of important
conversations on the place of African languages in Kenyan schools. While this is a topic
that has been extensively theorized in the U.S. context with regards to linguistically
diverse learners, the same is not true for Kenya. In Kenya, very little attention is afforded
to English Language Learners (who, in essence, are a majority of Kenyan learners,
considering that Kenya is largely multilingual with most people learning their African
languages and Swahili before learning English). This reality underscores the importance
of this and similar studies that seek to highlight this important issue in Kenyan education
that we can no longer afford to ignore. This study has Kenyan as one of its contexts, but
the language in education issues faced in Kenya are echoed in other formerly colonized
African nations that are still reeling from the continuing effects of colonization on the
ways that language and multilingualism are treated in literacy and education.
In the United States, this study is significant because with increasing migration
across contexts, there is a growing number of international students from African nations
in U.S. universities, (and with reference to the specific population of participants in this
79 study, in education), and these universities need to recognize the value of the
multilingualism of their international students (both Kenyans and other nationalities) in
order to work collaboratively with them to create mutually respectful and beneficial
learning environments.
As established in this chapter, the scholarly literature and the theories reviewed
help us see that there is need for more to be known about transnational Kenyan teachers’
experiences in each of the domains that I have stated in the research question (i.e.
primary and secondary schooling in Kenya, teacher preparation in Kenya, teaching
experiences in Kenya, and graduate education in the United States). While there is some
rich research on language and identity in post-colonial Africa’s education (see for
example Campbell & Walsh 2010; Jones & Barkhuizen, 2011; Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007;
Maeda, 2009; Muthwii, 2004; Tembe & Norton, 2008), few focus on the personal
experiences of teachers. Additionally, in the United States, few studies look at the
language and identity experiences of transnational teachers from post-colonial African
nations, and even fewer look at those experiences across contexts from their experiences
in the country of origin to their experiences in the United States. I see the audience of this
work as teachers, administrators, parents, and other educational stakeholders in Kenya
who are invested in the educational success of bi/multilingual learners in Kenya. In the
United States, this work may be of interest to universities with bi/multilingual
international students, as well as domestic and international graduate students interested
in interrogating ways to make their classrooms more welcoming and inclusive of
diversity in their roles as graduate students, and as teaching assistants.
In the chapter that follows, I will discuss the methods and procedures of this
80 dissertation study, including a detailed explanation of how the scholarly literature and the
theories discussed in this chapter informed the designing of the interview protocols and
the data analysis processes for this dissertation study.
81 CHAPTER THREE:
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This dissertation study explores the language and identity experiences of
transnational Kenyan teachers currently pursuing graduate education in the United States,
with a focus on their experiences throughout their schooling and teaching lives in Kenya,
and the United States. In chapter two, I reviewed the literature and theories that informed
this study. In this chapter, I will discuss the methods and procedures for this dissertation
study and show some examples of the connections that I made with the literature and the
theories reviewed in chapter two. I introduce this chapter by providing a discussion of
qualitative interview as the method of inquiry that was used for this dissertation study.
This is followed by a discussion of the participant recruitment and selection processes
and an introduction of the ten participants. I then outline the data collection procedures,
followed by a discussion of the data analysis process. Finally, I discuss my researcher
subjectivities as an insider (Collins, 2004a) within the group that I am studying.
For this dissertation research study, I employed qualitative interview as the
method of inquiry. The choice of a research method depends largely on the research
question being asked in a study, and according to Seidman (2013), if the research
question, like is the case with this study, is concerned with participants’ experiences and
their “subjective understanding” (p. 10) of those experiences, then qualitative interview is
an appropriate method of inquiry for the study. The research question in this dissertation
study was: What are the post-colonial language and identity experiences of transnational
82 Kenyan teachers in graduate education programs in the United States in the following
domains: a) their primary and secondary schooling in Kenya b) their teacher preparation
in Kenya c) their teaching experiences in Kenya; and d) their graduate education in the
United States?
This research question was formulated based on the literature and theories that
were reviewed in chapter two. From the literature, I determined that school was one of
the major sites of linguistic suppression in post-colonial African nations, and that
teachers were often charged with the responsibility to enforce English-only policies in
school, thus making them complicit in this undermining of African languages. Therefore,
I wanted to know what the experiences of these teachers were with language and identity,
both in their time as students, and in their time as teachers. The theories also made strong
connections between language, race, and power. Because issues of race are not at the
forefront of most Kenyans’ lives, I decided to interview Kenyan teachers who are
currently in the United States in order to find out what their experiences were after
having lived in both the Kenyan context, where race is not immediately central, and the
U.S. context, where race issues are more a part of the day-to-day lives of people of
African descent. Therefore, the literature and the theories determined the four domains
that are included in the research question. And qualitative interview was the most
appropriate method for me in conducting this study because of its focus on participants’
personal experiences and the meanings that they make of those experiences (Wengraf,
2001).
83 Participants
Participant recruitment for this study was by word of mouth. I chose to recruit by
word of mouth because I initially made attempts to recruit from social media groups for
Kenyan students in the U.S. but did not get any responses. As a Kenyan graduate student
in the United States myself, I believe this might be because graduate students are often
very busy and might not be in a position to respond to calls to participate in the research
of a person they have no connections with. Therefore, I decided to use the network of
personal and professional connections that I had to find participants that met the criteria
for this study. The set criteria was that a potential participant had to be black, a Kenyan
that went to school in Kenya, multilingual, a certified teacher in Kenya, and enrolled in a
graduate program in the U.S. While I had some connections with people that fit these
criteria, I wanted more participants, and so I reached out to other professional
connections, and they introduced me to more potential participants. In total, I had an
initial count of fourteen potential participants. Of the fourteen, three withdrew before the
study begun because they could not commit to the amount of time that the study required.
One completed three of the five interviews but had to withdraw from the study due to
time constraints and difficulty scheduling meetings. This dissertation study was therefore
conducted with a total of ten participants. All the participants that met the criteria, were
recruited, and were able to commit to conducting five interviews, each about an hour
long, were included in the study.
The ten participants in this study came from different linguistic, cultural, and
family backgrounds. Table 3.1 below provides an overview of the ten participants,
84 including their teaching backgrounds. The table is immediately followed by more
detailed profiles of the participants.
Name
Gender
Age
Native
Teaching
Years
African
Subject
Teaching the U.S.
Language
Nicole
Female
Early 30s
Meru
Years in
in Kenya
English/Literat
5
2
16
3
11
3
1
11
ure
Daniel
Male
Early 40s
Embu
Physics/Chemi
stry
Kariuki
Male
Late 30s
Kikuyu
Mathematics
Chemistry
Eva
Female
Early 40s
Luhya
French
Education
Jackline
Female
Early 30s
Kamba
Mathematics
4
1
Mercy
Female
Early 50s
Luo
Mathematics
15
2
Valerie
Female
Late 30s
Luo
English
2.5
16
13
7
7
3
Literature
Isaac
Male
Mid 40s
Duruma
Mathematics
Geography
Faith
Female
Early 30s
Kikuyu
Mathematics
Chemistry
Sally
Female
Early 40s
Kikuyu
Special
2
Education
85 Agriculture
Geography
Table 3.1: A summary of participant profiles
Below, in no particular order, I will introduce the ten participants that were
interviewed for this dissertation study. The profiles include basic information about each
participant’s family background, their linguistic backgrounds, and their schooling. The
decision to introduce the participants prior to going into the findings chapter was based
on my desire to foreground the participants and their experiences as the focus of this
qualitative interview study. It is for this reason too that I privilege participants’ own
words in chapters four and five. I wanted the participants and their experiences to be
central to this work. To protect the confidentiality of the participants, all the names used
for participants in this dissertation are pseudonyms.
Mercy
At the time of this study, Mercy was a PhD student in Mathematics education at a
public university in the Midwest region of the U.S. I was introduced to Mercy by a
mutual professional contact in 2014. When I contacted her about the study, Mercy was
enthusiastic about participating. She wanted to help and was very generous with her time.
Mercy and I did both phone and Skype interviews due to distance. Mercy grew up in
Nairobi. Her mother was a housewife and her father was a fuel attendant. She was one of
eight siblings, three of whom died in infancy. Her father passed away about five years
ago, but her mother is still alive in their rural home in Western Kenya, near Lake
Victoria. Mercy is from the Luo community. In communicating with their parents and
86 some uncles and aunts that lived with them, Mercy and her siblings spoke Luo. However,
amongst themselves, they spoke a mix of Luo and Swahili as they picked Swahili from
their friends in the neighborhood. Both of Mercy’s parents understood Swahili, and her
father understood a little bit of English.
Mercy went to a nursery school where the language of instruction was a mix of
both English and Swahili. At standard one though, she went to a day school where
English was the language of instruction, and the only language that was generally spoken
in the school. The school had students and teachers from a variety of linguistic
backgrounds, with about two thirds of the student population consisting of Indians, and a
majority of the teachers being either European nuns, or Indian.
Coming from a home where they spoke Luo mostly, Mercy struggled with
English for the first year, but she quickly caught up and did not grow up with struggles in
English. Mercy stayed in this school, which was run by catholic missionaries and nuns,
all the way from standard one to form four. For her A levels, she went to a school in
Kisumu where students spoke English in class and Luo outside of class.
Mercy went into teaching because it was the only opportunity that was presented
to her at the time. After her training, she taught in both rural and urban schools for a total
of 15 years before getting her masters’ degree and getting a job as a lecturer at a private
university in Kenya. She took a study leave from her lecturing job to pursue her PhD in
the United States. By the time of this study, she had been in the states for just over one
year. She also communicated regularly with her professional colleagues in Kenya, and
also with her family back in Kenya, including her husband and children.
87 After completing her PhD program, Mercy’s plans were to go back and teach at
the university in Kenya where she was still employed as a lecturer at the time of this
study.
Jackline
At the time of this study, Jackline was a PhD student in mathematics education at
a university in the Northeast region of the U.S. I met Jackline in the summer of 2014. She
was newly arrived in the U.S., and was just getting used to her new environment and
settling down into the routine of taking and teaching classes in a U.S. university.
Jackline’s father was a teacher and her mother was a hospital attendant before becoming
a housewife and farmer. She has five siblings, including one who is currently an
engineer, one who works for the UN, a teacher, and three that are university students. She
is also married with a young son. At the time of this study, Jackline was making plans for
her family to join her in the U.S.
Jackline was born and raised in a village in Kitui, which is in the Eastern parts of
Kenya. She went to local schools all the way until she completed form four. As a child,
Jackline kept to herself a lot and did not socialize much, except with her elder brother,
who was her best friend. Her mother tongue, Kamba, was their language of
communication at home and in the community, as most people in the area were Kambas.
At school, Kamba was the language of instruction for the first three years of school, and
English was introduced at standard four. For high school, Jackline went to a boarding
school within the area where she grew up.
Being a teacher, Jackline’s father was very fluent in English, and he encouraged
them to learn English by speaking both English and Kamba at home once they started
88 learning it in school. He would also correct their accents when they spoke English with a
Kamba accent.
Jackline went into teaching because that was the degree she was accepted into a
public university with. Her dream was to become a doctor, but she accepted teaching
when it was offered to her. She trained as a mathematics teacher. Shortly after her
graduation, Jackline got a scholarship from a Kenyan university to pursue a Masters
degree in pure mathematics. She also worked as a graduate assistant during that time,
before getting a job as an assistant lecturer at the same university. After about four years
of teaching in Kenya, Jackline was accepted into a PhD program in the U.S.
Daniel
At the time of this study, Daniel was a PhD student in Science teaching at a
university in the Northeast region of the U.S. I first met Daniel about four years
previously through a mutual professional contact. He was friendly and talkative. He
cracked a lot of jokes and was the kind of person that had no problems laughing at
himself. Daniel’s parents were career farmers from Embu, and although they were both
literate in English, his father did not speak English, mostly because of lack of confidence
in his fluency.
Daniel was born in Nairobi, but his family moved back to their rural home when
he was young. He grew up the second of four brothers in a household where Kiembu was
the language of communication initially. English, Swahili, and sheng’ was the languages
of communication between him and his siblings, while Kiembu was reserved for
communicating with their parents and other members of the community.
89 Having spent the first years of his life in Nairobi, Daniel learned English before
he learned Kiembu. But when he moved to Embu, there was pressure to speak the way
everybody else was speaking, and he developed some of the Kiembu accent in his
English. After high school, Daniel moved back to Nairobi for college, where he trained as
a Physics teacher. Daniel taught at various school, including a rural school in one of the
most remote areas of Kenya, and a national school in Nairobi, for a total of sixteen years
before being accepted into a PhD program in the United States.
Isaac
At the time of this study, Isaac was a part-time PhD student in mathematics
education at a university in the Midwest region of the United States. Prior to this, he had
been a full time PhD student at a different university, but was dismissed from the
program. Isaac was born and raised in Kwale, at the coastal region of Kenya, where his
father worked for the county council as an accounts assistant. His father had dropped out
of school at form two, and spoke only a little bit of English, and his mother only had a
primary education and spoke no English at all. In his family, they spoke Duruma. The
unique thing about Isaac was that he considered Swahili somewhat of a mother tongue to
him. His actual mother tongue was Duruma, which along with Swahili, stems from the
Mijikenda language. So although Duruma was his actual mother tongue, and each
Mijikenda language had it’s own slight variations, he could speak any other language in
the Mijikenda family.
Isaac went to a local public primary school in his community that was run mostly
by the nuns at a nearby mission. The language of instruction in the first three years of
school was Swahili, but beginning at standard four, students were no longer expected to
90 speak Swahili in school. Isaac went through the old 763 education system, and for high
school, he went to a boys only boarding junior seminary school that prepared young
catholic boys to join the vocation of priesthood if they so chose. Isaac did not choose
priesthood, but instead pursued a career in teaching. He had not planned on becoming a
teacher, but because that was the only choice he was given, he accepted it and trained as a
Mathematics and Geography teacher.
Isaac taught at various secondary schools and a teachers’ training college in
Kenya for several years before moving to the U.S. to pursue a PhD in curriculum and
instruction with an emphasis in mathematics.
Faith
At the time of this study, Faith was a PhD student in Mathematics education at a
university in the Northeast region of the U.S. Faith was born and raised in Central Kenya
to a family of four children. Her parents did not have a formal education but did some
business for a living. While Kikuyu was the main language spoken in her family, she and
her siblings would sometimes speak Swahili and English amongst themselves. They
would however not speak a word of English to their parents, even though her father
encouraged them to, because they felt it would be intimidating for their parents, who did
not speak any English. At school, there was an emphasis on students speaking in English.
From my interactions with Faith, I noticed that she had a strong Kikuyu accent.
She said to me that English was never a strength for her. Although her grammar was
good, she pronounced her words with an accent, which was never a problem for me
because I could understand her perfectly well, given the fact that I am highly familiar
with the Kikuyu accent. Faith taught mathematics and chemistry in Kenya for seven years
91 before coming to the U.S. as a masters student in teaching and curriculum- mathematics
education.
Eva
At the time of this study, Eva was a PhD student in education, and a Kiswahili
language teacher at a public university in the Mideast region of the U.S. I first met Eva at
a conference about three years previously. Subsequently, we kept in touch and talked on
the phone a number of times. Eva came from a family of nine, with a father who held a
college degree in English and Literature, and Philosophy and Religion. Her mother
worked for the ministry of education in Kenya. Two American missionaries adopted her
father when he was young and raised him in Kenya. Her father was born in 1947, and
during that time, missionaries were looking for young Kenyan children to adopt
(including children who already had families capable of raising them) with the intention
of converting them to Christianity, and eventually training them to be priests. Her father
did train to become a Catholic priest, but then he left to marry her mother.
Eva’s parents raised a number of her uncles and aunts and paid for them to go to
school since both of her parents had jobs. As a result, Eva was greatly influenced by these
extended family members in her life. She would read the books that her uncles and aunts,
who were slightly older, were reading, and as such was reading at a higher level than
other children her age. Her father having a degree in literature also meant that they had an
abundance of books at home that she liked to read. At some point, her father was the
principal of a school, and they had Peace Corps coming to the school, and one of the
Peace Corps ladies lived with them. She would buy Eva some books and encourage her to
92 read. At age nine, Eva was reading Maya Angelou books, and she was exposed to slavery
and African American history.
Although Eva spoke in English with her parents, she also had a good grasp of
Swahili as her family lived in a part of Nairobi inhabited by a lot of Tanzanians and
Somalis before moving to Kakamega in Western Kenya. For high school, Eva went to a
girls-only national school comprising of some of the country’s best performing students.
When she graduated high school, Eva was offered a place at a public university to study
French and Education. Although teaching had not been her first choice, she went for it
and studied French and education. The only teaching that Eva did in a high school was
for her teaching practice, and when she graduated, she found a job with an NGO in
Kenya where she worked until she moved to the U.S. to pursue graduate studies in
education. To support her studies, Eva got a teaching assistantship teaching Kiswahili at
her university.
Sally
At the time of this study, Sally was a Certificate of Advanced Studies (CAS)
student in Special Education at a university in the Northeast region of the U.S. Sally was
also enrolled in a PhD program in Kenya, and she was in the CAS program through a
collaboration project between her university and the university she attended in the U.S. I
was introduced to Sally by a mutual acquaintance about two years ago. Sally was born in
Nyeri to a family with five children. Her father was a high school teacher, and her mother
was a housekeeper at a school. As a child, Sally picked up a lot of Kimeru, which was her
mother’s native language, because she spent the first few years of her life living in Meru
district. Later on, her family moved to her father’s home in Nyeri, where she learned
93 some Kikuyu, her father’s native language. In their household, the children would speak
Kimeru with their mother and amongst themselves, and Kikuyu with their father. The two
languages were however close enough that they could all understand each other
regardless of what language one was speaking. They would also mix the two languages if
needed because her younger siblings, who were born after the move to Nyeri, were not
very fluent in Kimeru, and her mother was not very fluent in Kikuyu. Sally was more
fluent in Kimeru because that was also the language of instruction at school during the
first three years of her schooling.
Being a school teacher, her father coached them in math and science at home, and
that involved a lot of speaking in English as well. He bought them storybooks, and even
subscribed to a children’s magazine so that they could read at home. Sally corresponded
with pen pals that she found on the magazine and filled out crossword puzzles, in
addition to reading. As a result, Sally developed strong language competencies in English
early on. Once Kimeru was dropped as the language of instruction in her standard four,
the students were expected to speak only in English at school. Sally went to a high school
where a majority of the students spoke a different mother tongue than her own. She
learned a little bit of the language but spoke in English for the most part throughout high
school.
Sally had always wanted to be a teacher. Her father was a teacher, and throughout
her life, she had had admiration for her teachers and the work that they did. When she
completed her A levels and failed to make the requirements for a public university, she
applied and got into a diploma teacher training college. She specialized as a Geography
and Agriculture teacher. After teaching high school for four years, she went back to
94 school to pursue a bachelor’s degree in library science and special education, followed by
a master’s degree in education psychology. Once she completed those degrees, she
worked as a special education teacher for several years before enrolling for a PhD
program at a university in Kenya. It was in the course of pursuing her PhD in Kenya that
she landed the opportunity to come to the U.S. to take some course work for a certificate
of advanced study in disability studies.
Kariuki
At the time of this study, Kariuki was a PhD student in Mathematics education at
a university in the Northeast region of the U.S. Kariuki was born in the Korogocho area
of Nairobi, which he described as a slum area. His parents did different kinds of semiskilled work before eventually his father became the representative of a church at an
NGO and his mother started a shop business. Both of Kariuki’s parents are Kikuyu, and
he associated himself with his father’s clan, the “Wethaga”. Kariuki explained that the
legend of the origin of the Kikuyu community has it that the original mother and father of
the Kikuyu community, Gikuyu and Mumbi, had nine daughters. One of the daughters
was called Wethaga, and that is the daughter that his family is descended from. A
descendant of Wethaga was called a “Mwithaga”, and so Kariuki referred to himself as
such.
As a city kid, Kariuki grew up speaking sheng’ with his peers. He interacted with
children from different linguistic backgrounds and picked up bits and pieces of many
different languages. Within his family, Swahili was the language of communication most
of the time. His mother had also grown up in the city and she spoke fluent Swahili. His
father on the other hand, had moved to the city after high school, and although he spoke
95 some Swahili, he preferred English. His father bought newspapers, and so Kariuki read a
lot of newspapers, and books, and he listened to the radio a lot.
Kariuki went to school in Nairobi, and the languages of instruction at the lower
primary level were Swahili and English. After lower primary, English took over as the
sole language of instruction. For high school, Kariuki decided to move from Nairobi and
go to a high school around his rural home.
Kariuki’s dream had been to either be a doctor or to study business. But after high
school, he was offered a place at a public university to study mathematics and chemistry
education. After graduating, Kariuki taught at various high schools in and outside
Nairobi, and got two masters’ degrees, one in teacher education and the other in guidance
and counseling. He then moved to the U.S. to pursue a PhD in Mathematics education
while his family stayed behind in Kenya.
Valerie
I first met Valerie in Kenya about seventeen years ago when she was an English
teacher at a high school in the western region of Kenya. I was about thirteen years old at
the time, and I greatly admired Valerie’s vibrant personality and her love for English. I
aspired to be a writer at the time, and so I was drawn to Valerie’s impeccable use of
language. Valerie left for the U.S. shortly after our initial meeting in Kenya. I
reconnected with her when I began this study. At the time of this study, Valerie was a
PhD student in education at a university in the Southern region of the U.S.
Valerie was born and raised in Nairobi. She was the third of four children, and
both of her parents were career people. Her father owned his own business and worked in
the pharmaceutical arena, and her mother for a large communications corporation in
96 Kenya. Her grandparents also lived in Nairobi for a while, with her grandfather working
for the railway company. Her extended family played a big role in her growing up. She
would spend a lot of school vacations living with her cousins in any one of the cousins’
houses or her own. They would move around to each other’s homes and live there for a
month or two at a time.
Although she grew up in Nairobi, her parents often insisted to her and her siblings
that they did not belong in Nairobi. They wanted Valerie and her siblings to maintain
strong ties with where they were really from, which was their rural home in Nyanza, and
with their native language, Luo.
Valerie did not have much trouble with the English language in school. She went
to schools where English was the dominant language of communication among both
teachers and students. She was taught by teachers from Indian, European, and African
backgrounds, and the student population was equally diverse, with Indian, white, and
black African students. Valerie learned to speak some Luo because her parents made sure
she spent some time in their rural home among relatives that spoke Luo. However, she
noted that up until today, she still speaks it with an English accent. With English being
the dominant language in her life, the English accent would creep in even when she was
trying to speak Luo.
Valerie pointed out that after completing high school, she fell into teaching “by
default”. University admission into public universities came with a degree program
already chosen for you based on your results from the Kenya Certificate of Secondary
Education examinations. She had wanted to go into journalism, but when she was
admitted into the education program, her parents encouraged her to go for it, citing that
97 her grandmother had been a teacher too. Valerie decided to specialize in English and
literature. She did some teaching at a private school in Nairobi, and an all girls boarding
school in rural Nyanza before coming to the U.S. to pursue higher education.
Nicole
At the time of this study, Nicole was a PhD student in literacy education at a
university in the Northeast region of the U.S. Nicole was born and raised in the Eastern
region of Kenya as one of nine children in her family. Her father was a veterinary officer
and her mother was a housewife. At home, Nicole spoke Kimeru with her family
members, and when she started school, Kimeru was the language of instruction for the
first three years, though English and Swahili were also gradually introduced during that
time. Beginning at standard four, English became the language of instruction and students
were expected to speak in English while at school.
Her parents encouraged Nicole and her siblings to speak in English as much as
possible. They never questioned it when she or her siblings were caned in school for
speaking Kimeru. In fact, they would ask them why they were speaking Kimeru at school
in the first place. However, at home, her family spoke Kimeru.
Nicole’s plan after high school was to study law, but due to some technicalities,
she ended up in education. She decided to specialize in English and literature. For her
teaching practice, Nicole taught at a school in Nairobi for one school term. She did not
teach high school after her graduation, but instead enrolled into a masters’ program. As a
masters’ student, she taught some university level courses at her university in Kenya and
also did some work with an NGO in Kenya. After completing her masters’ program, she
moved to the United States to pursue a PhD in literacy education.
98 Data Collection
This dissertation study was conducted in the United States, with Kenyan teachers
from different universities across the country. I conducted a total of fifty semi-structured
qualitative interviews, five each with ten participants. The five interviews all consisted of
open-ended questions that would allow for participants to tell their experiences in ways
that best represented their experiences. The interview questions stemmed from the review
of the literature and from the theoretical frameworks used in this study. For example, the
literature indicated that parents viewed English as the language of upward mobility, and
as such, they emphasized the speaking of English with their children, both at home and at
school (Tembe & Norton, 2008; Jones & Barkhuizen, 2011; Campbell & Walsh 2010;
Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007). Therefore, with each participant, I asked questions about his or her
childhood, what his or her parents did for a living, what languages they spoke at home,
what his or her parents’ attitudes towards each of the languages they spoke were, what
kinds of reading and writing they did at home, and so on. While the questions did stem
from what was in the literature, and the theories, I was careful to frame the questions in
open-ended and non-leading ways in order to avoid influencing what the participants did
or did not say. The interview protocols for this dissertation study can be found in
Appendix A.
The interviews progressed chronologically from the first one that asked about
their early education, to the last one that asked about their future plans. The first
interview protocol focused on the participant’s experiences growing up in their families,
and during their primary and secondary schooling in Kenya. As previously pointed out,
this domain of interview protocols was informed by the literature that showed that
99 schools were some of the major sources of linguistic suppression (see for example
Campbell & Walsh 2010; Jones & Barkhuizen, 2011; Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007; Muthwii,
2004; Orwenjo, 2012; Tembe & Norton, 2008). The second interview protocol focused
on their experiences with teacher preparation. I chose to include this domain because I
wanted to find out if the participants received any training in their teacher preparation
programs that prepared them to work with multilingual learners.
The third interview protocol asked questions about their experiences with
teaching after completing their training. Like with the first domain, this domain was
informed by the same literature cited above, which showed that teachers in post-colonial
African nations are often charged with teaching in English and enforcing English-only
policies.
The fourth interview protocol was focused on their experiences in the United
States, both as students, and as teaching assistants. This domain was informed by the
literature from U.S. universities that showed that African international students (e.g.
Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; WamwaraMbugua & Cornwell, 2010) and other linguistic and cultural minority students (e.g.
Pailliotet, 1997; Shin, 2011) often experienced stigmatization of their vernacular
languages and identities in their U.S. universities. Other literature shows that when
African-born youth get to the United States, they get raced in ways that often don’t make
sense to them (Ripley Crandall, 2012). What we don’t know is how people charged with
teaching in English experience race in the United States. The fourth domain in this
research was therefore designed to find out what the transnational Kenyan teachers’
100 experiences were in the United States with regards to language and identity, both of
which are highly raced in the United States (Lippi-Green, 2004).
The fifth and final interview protocol asked the participants about their plans for
the future. This interview protocol was not part of the four domains in the research
questions, but I included a fifth interview with each participant in order to find out what
their plans for the future were, and what their hopes for the future were given their
experiences that they had shared in the first four interviews. This fifth protocol was
deemed important because these teachers are future teacher educators, who will likely be
charged with training other teachers to teach multilingual learners in English-speaking
settings. And so their plans and their views on what they saw as ways they wanted to
uphold those responsibilities in the future were central to this study.
The participants were interviewed over the course of seven months. Because I had
a group of participants that was made up of graduate students who were very busy with
their own work, I scheduled interviews for whenever they were available. However, I
made sure to have at least a few days in between interviews for each participant so that I
would have time to go over the interview again and take note of things I wanted to follow
up on before conducting the next interview with the same participant.
Interviews were carried out face-to-face, over the phone, or via Skype, depending
on the participant’s location. The participants that lived and studied close enough that I
could have face-to-face interviews with, I often met for the interviews and then spent
some time socially with, often an hour or so to grab coffee or lunch. Some participants
invited me into their houses, and on one occasion, which I mention in chapter five, a
participant invited me to a party she was attending with other Kenyans. Some participants
101 lived out of state, and for these participants, I conducted either phone or Skype
interviews. I did not spend as much time with these participants outside of our interviews,
except for one, Eva, who took a deep interest in my research and contacted me often after
our interviews were done to chat about various topics of mutual interest. One of the
limitations of conducting interviews with some participants on Skype and over the phone
was that these interviews were a little less personal in comparison to the interviews that
were conducted face-to-face.
I arranged face-to-face interviews at various locations depending on what was
most convenient for the participant. For example, some participants invited me to conduct
interviews at their houses, some met with me on campus, and some met with me at
various locations in the community, including one who met with me at her church. Each
interview was audiotaped, and lasted about one hour. Naturally, some interviews got
more data than others. Particularly, I got the most data from the first (primary and
secondary schooling), third (teaching experiences in Kenya), and fourth (graduate
education in the U.S.) interviews with participants, and the least data from the second
(teacher training in Kenya) and the fifth (future plans and aspirations). This is because
most participants did not have much to say about their teacher training since most of
them did not recall receiving any training that focused on supporting the literacy learning
of multilingual learners. The fifth interview was naturally shorter because it focused on
the participants’ plans and aspirations for the future. I also found that I did not need to
ask some of the questions in the interview protocols, because in answering one question,
participants often ended up answering one or more of the other questions that I had
planned to ask. Because the interviews were semi-structured, and rather than stop them
102 when they answered more than one question at once, I let them keep talking, readjusted
my protocol, and followed up accordingly to ensure that each of the questions was
eventually covered, even though it might not have been in the order that they were
arranged in my protocol.
All interviews were subsequently transcribed. I transcribed some interviews
myself, but also employed the services of a transcriber for some interviews. I checked all
interviews that were transcribed by the transcriber for accuracy by comparing the
transcripts to the audio recordings. I then sent each participant a copy of their interviews
to check for accuracy and also to keep for their own personal records.
Data Analysis
Data analysis was conducted using thematic analysis, and was also informed by
post-colonial and linguistic imperialism theories. The decision to use thematic analysis
was informed by the nature of this study, which looked at the language and identity
experiences of ten Kenyan teachers. I was interested in finding out if there were themes
that ran across their various experiences, so I selected thematic analysis as a method of
analyzing the data. In thematic analysis, groups of qualitatively similar data are
categorized together and labeled for the dominating qualities that make them similar
(Boyatzis, 1998). These categories then form the anchors from which themes and codes
are developed. I went into this dissertation study with a research question that was
heavily influenced by my own positionality as a multilingual Kenyan teacher pursuing
graduate education in the United States. The interview protocols that I created for this
study were also heavily influenced by the literature and the theories that frame this study
as was explained earlier in this chapter. Therefore, the data analysis process was also
103 heavily influenced by the literature, and the theories. I chose to follow Boyatzis’ (1998)
model for thematic analysis because his model has been successfully used by other
researchers in education, including Skolaski (2012) and Ortaçtepe (2013), and also
because of the level of detail that he provides in his book (Boyatzis,1998), which focuses
exclusively on thematic analysis and discusses in great detail each step for analyzing data
using this method. I was therefore able to follow this model and personalize it to my
specific study by drawing from the specific theories that frame this study while also
constantly returning to the research question as I analyzed the data.
In thematic analysis, the themes can be derived from existing theories and logical
possibilities, or inductively from the data (Boyatzis, 1998). This dissertation study
employed inductive, or data-driven methods to develop the themes and codes for the
analysis of data. While the themes and codes in this dissertation study were developed
from the data, the data came from interview protocols that were developed based on the
theories that frame this study. For example, because post-colonial theory talks
extensively about the domination and suppression of colonized languages and cultures,
the protocols were designed to get participants talking about their experiences with their
native languages as well as English, which in this case was the dominating language. I
asked participants about the attitudes and ideologies that surrounded these languages in
their homes and in their schools. In the analysis stage however, the themes were
developed inductively from the data.
In analyzing the data, I was guided by Boyatzis’ (1998) methods for conducting
thematic data analysis because I was interested in looking at participants’ experiences in
terms of the themes that emerged across participants. Rather than focusing on individual
104 participants separately, I wanted to focus more on themes across participants and then
examine how those themes manifested in individual participants’ experiences. Having
every participant’s experiences represented individually was not possible because of the
high number of participants and the large amount of data that was collected. Additionally,
there were a lot of parallels in the experiences of the participants, and so it made more
sense to consider those parallels in the form of themes across participants’ experiences.
The steps that I followed in conducting thematic analysis are summarized in figure 3.2
below.
Stage 1: Sampling and design issues • Select subsamples Stage 2: Developing themes and a code • Reduce the raw information • Identify themes within subsamples • compare themes across subsamples • create a code Stage 3: Steps in validating a code • Apply the code to remaining raw information • Interpret results Figure 3.2: Stages and steps for thematic analysis
I transcribed each interview as soon after the interview was conducted as possible.
That provided me with an opportunity to hear the participant’s interviews again. For the
interviews that were transcribed by someone else, I listened back to the interview audios
while comparing with the transcripts to check for accuracy while simultaneously building
a deeper familiarity with each participant’s experiences. Once I had a complete set of
105 interview transcripts for a participant, I read the transcripts over from the first one to the
last in order to get a complete mental picture of each participant’s experiences.
Boyatzis (1998) recommends that in the first stage of thematic analysis, a subsample be selected from the samples in the research data and used as the basis for
developing a code. In the case of interviews as data sources, the interview transcripts
form the basis for developing the codes. When I had all fifty interviews transcribed and I
had read them over and established a mental picture of each participant’s overall
experiences, I picked a subsample of four participants’ transcripts to use in the process of
developing a code (Boyatzis, 1998). Of the four, I felt that two had fairly consistent
positive feelings towards their African languages and identities, and the other two, at
least at some points in their lives, had some negative feelings towards their African
languages and identities. This categorization was in following Boyatzis’ (1998)
recommendation that groups of qualitatively similar experiences be grouped together in
analysis. The participants picked were Faith and Sally (as the two that had fairly
consistent positive feelings towards their African languages), and Daniel and Eva (as the
two who at some points in their lives sought to distance themselves from their African
languages). Note that all participants’ names were changed to pseudonyms in order to
protect their confidentiality.
The purpose of grouping participants in this way was not to categorize or label
them but rather to help me process the data in a way that would make it possible for me
to better understand each participant. In fact, none of the four participants fit perfectly
into either category, because like every human, every participant in the study had
contradictions and inconsistencies in their life experiences. While Faith had some
106 vernacular-influenced accent in her spoken English, and both she and Sally were very
proud of their African languages and identities, Daniel had a barely noticeable accent and
did not feel the need to highlight his African language or African identity. Eva was
somewhere in between, not having had a lot of constant exposure to her African language
growing up. Daniel was the only participant from all ten participants, to maintain the
position of distancing himself from his African language and identity, although Eva did
the same as a high school student before changing her perspective. Participants with
relatively high connections to their African languages and participants with relatively low
connections to the African languages became the anchors (Boyatzis, 1998), and the
source for the subsamples for code development. Although this study was not concerned
with measuring the degree to which the participants were connected to their African
languages, but rather on their overall experiences with language and identity, following
Boyatzis’ (1998) recommendation for using subsamples to create a code was useful as a
guide for creating a common code that could then be applied to all the interview data.
The second stage in Boyatzis’ (1998) thematic analysis is the developing of
themes and a code. In this step, I reduced the raw interview data by re-reading the
interview transcripts and making a summary of each of their interviews. By doing this, I
was mentally internalizing each of the participants’ experiences as well as “consciously
processing the information” (Boyatzis, 1998, p. 45). Although Boyatzis (1998)
recommends doing this step with just the subsample, I made summaries of all ten
participants’ interviews, which then served as a roadmap for me in looking at each
participant’s complete profile and determining which themes were most prominent in
their interview recounts of their experiences.
107 During this process, I was being guided by my research questions: What are the
post-colonial language and identity experiences of transnational Kenyan teachers in
graduate education programs in the United States in the following domains: a) their
primary and secondary schooling in Kenya b) their teacher preparation in Kenya c) their
teaching experiences in Kenya; and d) their graduate education in the United States?
Therefore in my summaries, I used these questions as a guide, organizing the summary in
the order of the research question, starting with their primary and secondary schooling
experiences in Kenya and ending with their graduate education experiences in the U.S.
The summaries included information about their family background, such as their
linguistic and cultural background, the occupations of their parents, the languages they
spoke at home, and the languages that were emphasized within their families. I also
included information about the languages they spoke at school, and how different
languages were treated within their schools. If a participant said that they were punished
for speaking a certain language in school, I included that information. If they said that
they were not punished for speaking any particular language, but that it was expected that
they speak a certain language, I also included that information. None of the participants
said that there were neither specific expectation nor specific consequences for speak
African languages in school. Next, I included information about their teacher training,
which included their teaching practice. All participants said they did not take any specific
courses that focused on preparing them to teach in multilingual/multicultural classrooms.
Therefore, the information about their teacher training that was included focused on their
experiences with teaching practice, which is the time they spent in schools as student
teacher. Finally, I included information about their experiences with language and
108 identity in the United States. I included information they shared about how their
languages, nationalities, race, and accents were perceived and treated in the classes they
took as students as well as in the classes they taught as teaching assistants. I also included
general information that they shared about how they experienced race, language, and
identity in the United States.
While the organization of the summaries was influenced by the research question,
the information that was included was heavily a result of the theories that guide this
dissertation study. For example, English linguistic imperialism theory (Phillipson, 1992)
is concerned with the ways that English, as a colonial language, dominates and
suppresses other languages. With this theory at the back of my mind, I looked for
instances where participants talked about their relationships with English and with the
other languages in their linguist repertoire. Since the interviews protocols were also
influenced by theory, it was only natural that although data analysis was data-driven,
theory had an influence on the data collected.
After reducing the raw data, the next step was to identify themes within the
samples. In identifying the themes in the data, I was guided by the theories that frame this
dissertation study (post-colonial theories, and linguistic imperialism theories). For
example, in post-colonial theory, Said (1979) talks about the idea that the West
misrepresents colonized peoples to themselves and makes them believe in their own
inferiority by constantly telling them that they are primitive and less than. In reading
through the transcripts, I identified instances of this misrepresentation, and the
subsequent belief in one’s own inferiority in the participants’ interviews. I would identify
instances of this, for example, when a participant talked about laughing at his or her peers
109 when they spoke African languages or with African accents. Or when people got upset
and disassociated themselves with someone because that person liked to speak in an
African language. Kariuki, for example, said that his colleagues would get upset with him
when he spoke Kikuyu, deeming it inappropriate for the workplace. As a student, Sally
also talked about laughing at her peers when they spoke with mother tongue accents.
The theories (post-colonial theories and linguistic imperialism theories) also
elucidate the suppression of non-dominant languages and identities by dominant Western
languages and cultures (see for example Bhabha, 2000; Phillipson, 1992; Said, 1979).
Given this knowledge from the theories, one of the questions that I asked participants in
interview protocol one was: How was the language policy enforced in your K-12
schooling? In responding to this question, one of the participants, Sally, said the
following:
First there was this thing we used to call monto. Monto was like a big piece of
round metal, which was very difficult to hide. And so if you were heard speaking
it, I think it would start with the class prefect at the beginning of the day. So the
first person he hears speak Kimeru gets the monto. If you get the monto, it was so
embarrassing. So you don’t really want anyone to know you have the monto. And
you try as best as you can so that you don’t use Kimeru anymore. And you hide it
and you keep looking out for other people when they talk. You find a group
talking or a pair, if they mention a Kimeru word like this, you just give them and
you run away very happy. And the teachers also used to cane us if they heard you
speak in Kimeru. They would cane us severely. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2015)
110 So as I was reading this data from Sally during analysis, I was looking for words and
phrases that fit in with or went against the knowledge that we have from the theories
reviewed in chapter two. And so I marked up and made notes on the data as in the text
below. My notes are in bold italics.
First there was this thing we used to call monto (This is consistent with Wa
Thiong’o (1986). He had the same object as a student during colonization
period in Kenya). Monto was like a big piece of round metal, which was very
difficult to hide (Was this intentional, so other students could see who had the
monto? The theories say othered populations are often taught to associate their
languages and cultures with shame). And so if you were heard speaking it, I
think it would start with the class prefect at the beginning of the day. So the first
person he hears speak Kimeru gets the monto. If you get the monto, it was so
embarrassing (shaming them for speaking African languages. Consistent with
what the theories say colonial powers do in order to maintain the power
hierarchies). So you don’t really want anyone to know you have the monto. And
you try as best as you can so that you don’t use Kimeru anymore (Both postcolonial and linguistic imperialism theories say the effects of suppressing the
colonized is that they start to distance themselves from their languages.
Silencing?). And you hide it and you keep looking out for other people when they
talk (Another aspect of colonization is that the colonized are turned against
each other. Sounds here like now they had to pass on the embarrassment of the
monto to their peers). You find a group talking or a pair, if they mention a
Kimeru word like this, you just give them and you run away very happy. And the
111 teachers also used to cane us if they heard you speak in Kimeru. They would cane
us severely (Severe punishment for speaking in African languages). (Interview
1 with Sally, 7-5-2015)
In this example, both post-colonial and linguistic imperialism theories provided a way for
me to think about the data and a way for me to make sense of what the participants were
saying. In doing this, the theories determined how I analyzed the data by determining the
way I understood their words and the way I coded the data.
Although I made summaries for all the ten participants, I initially focused on the
four that I had selected as my subsamples in trying to identify the themes. I found that
most of the participants had experiences that were quite similar, and so it made sense to
follow Boyatzis’ (1998) suggestion and focus on the subsample to start with as I worked
on identifying themes. I compared the summaries made from the interviews of
participants in the subsample that had relatively high connections with their African
languages and identities (Sally and Faith), looking for similarities and patterns within the
subsamples. I also did the same comparison between the two participants from the
subsample that had relatively low connections to their African languages and identities
(Daniel and Eva). As a point of emphasis, the focus of this dissertation study was not to
measure the degree of connection to their African languages and identity, but this anchor
was used simply as a guide in the development of themes and a code for analysis. As a
result of the comparisons made within subsamples, I identified the themes that arose in
each of the two subsamples.
After identifying the themes within subsamples, I moved to the next step, which
involved comparing the themes that arose from the data across subsamples. The themes
112 in Faith and Sally’ interviews were compared to those in Daniel and Eva’s interviews. At
this point, I was looking for similarities and differences in the themes that emerged from
the data of the two anchor groups (Boyatzis, 1998). I found that the themes were
relatively similar in both groups. What varied was mostly the amount of importance or
significance that the different participants placed on the various themes. For example, all
participants experienced marginalization in some form as black, international students in
the United States. But not all participants thought it was a significant part of the way they
experienced their lives in the U.S. Some participants actively took notice of the
marginalization while others ignored it or found ways to give the situations the benefit of
the doubt. An example from the Kenyan context would be that all participants were proud
of their African languages and identities. But while some participants felt it was a big part
of who they were as individuals, some felt their African languages did not play a
significant role in how they thought about themselves.
Once I completed coming up with a list of themes, I moved on to the next step,
which involved creating a code. For this step, I wrote a list of the preliminary themes
while keeping in mind the differences in the way the two groups of subsamples expressed
this theme. The overarching preliminary themes were identified as the theme of
marginalization, and the theme of (re)claiming African languages and identities. These
larger themes were then broken down into subthemes, as outlined in figure 3.3 below,
which then became the code that informed what got included from the data.
113 Theme1: Marginalization Kenyan context Punishing students’ use of African languages Silencing African languages and identities Hierarchy of languages and identities Resisting the marginalization of African languages and identities. United States Context Becoming raced Linguistic and racial stereotyping in the US Silencing of African languages and identities Responses to marginalization Theme 2: (Re)claiming
African
languages and
identities Kenyan context
Nuances of language and identity affiliations
Honoring students’ home languages. United States Context
Nuances of language and identity affiliations
African languages and identities as capital
Figure 3.3: Themes and subthemes from the data
The third and final stage in the thematic analysis process was the validation of the
codes. Boyatzis (1998) points out that “[t]he strength and power of the data-driven
approach is that it uses, as much as possible, the way in which the themes appear in the
114 raw information as the starting point in code development. The validation with the entire
sample is a cross-check” (p. 51). To validate the codes developed from the data, I applied
the codes to all the data. That means that while I had focused on the four participants that
were picked as a subsample in identifying themes and creating the code, at this stage, the
codes were used to check for the identified themes in all the remaining participants’
interviews. The subthemes changed a few times throughout the coding and writing
process as multiple subthemes got compressed into one and vice versa. The themes and
subthemes represented in figure 3.3 are however the final themes and subthemes that
were used as the final codes that were applied to the data and that determined the data
included in, and the organization of, the findings chapters in this dissertation.
Researcher Subjectivities
Like all of my participants, I am a multilingual, black, Kenyan student in a
graduate program in education at a U.S. University. The languages that I have in my
linguistic toolkit are English, Swahili, and Kisii. Conversationally, Swahili is my most
comfortable language as it is the language I grew up speaking, and the language I use
with those closest to me. English is my most comfortable language in writing. I can write
all three languages well, but since English has been the language of instruction
throughout my schooling life, I have developed more academic literacies in it than any of
the other languages. Kisii is my native African language. While I can understand almost
anything that is said in Kisii, I can speak only a very basic amount of the language.
I spent some time thinking about who I am in relationship to my chosen topic of
study. My shared background with my participants makes me an insider to the experience
of being a black, African-born, multilingual teacher in a western university. However, I
115 do not assume that my experiences and those of my participants are the same. Kenyan
people are diverse and their experiences are diverse as well. Throughout the study, I was
aware of my own personal investment in the topic because as a multilingual language
teacher, I have obvious subjectivities regarding issues of language and identity. I was
deeply aware that somehow, I did have an agenda going in to do this work. I wanted to
challenge the deficit mentalities that, as the literature reveals, institutions, societies, and
even we as Africans, have about our own languages.
I was born in a rural farming village in western Kenya in the mid 1980s before my
family moved to Malaba, a small town bordering Kenya and Uganda. Both of my parents
were multilingual in Kisii, Swahili, and English. My mother spent a few years as an
untrained primary school teacher before I was born, but gave up teaching to be a stay-athome mother. My father was an immigration officer before starting his own insurance
business. Because my father worked in the city, I spent the first few years of my life
living with my mother. She spoke a mix of Kisii and Swahili to us, but we always
answered her back in Swahili, regardless of what language she spoke to us in. This was
largely because we lived in an area where the predominant languages were Teso and
Swahili. Teso was the language of the local community, but being a border town with a
lot of business happening at the border of Kenya and Uganda, Swahili was also widely
spoken.
Both of my parents died when I was about ten years old. My oldest sister, who
was a sophomore in college at the time, took on the responsibility of raising me and four
other siblings. In the absence of our parents, nobody ever spoke Kisii in our house, except
116 when members of our extended family visited. My older siblings were fluent enough in
Kisii, but they did not go out of their way to speak it.
Fifteen years ago, I would probably have been quite proud of the fact that I am
not very fluent in Kisii. I learned from an early age that it is more prestigious, and more
classy, to be able to speak English, or even Swahili, than one’s native tongue. I was
taught, in many direct and indirect ways, that my native tongue was primitive, and that it
was something I should disassociate myself with. For example, in primary school, we had
a disk that was passed around to those who spoke African languages and Swahili in
school. Those who got the disk would then be caned or given some manual work to do at
the end of the school day. Since I did not speak Kisii conversationally, whenever I got the
disk, it was because I spoke Swahili. My fluency in English was very minimal before
high school, and I did not fancy making a fool of myself by trying to speak in English, so
the only way I could avoid the disk was to be quiet in school. Additionally, instruction
was largely teacher-centered, and we were not expected to speak much in class.
I went to all-girls boarding schools from standard five all the way through high
school. This alienated me even further from the Kisii language and identity since the
boarding schools I went to were predominantly Luo. In boarding school, there were
cliques of girls, and they tended to be based on social backgrounds. Girls from the city
had their own cliques, and they spoke English and sheng’. Girls from small towns also
had their cliques and they spoke Swahili. Girls from rural areas also stuck together and
spoke their mother tongues whenever they could, since speaking African languages was
generally not allowed. I was a loner. I could fit in with just about anybody when I was
being social, but for the most part I was distant and dreamy. I liked to read. I read any and
117 every novel I could get my hands on. I read novels even during instruction in class, and
that got me in trouble a lot. I also liked to write stories, which I was happy to share with
anyone that would read them. I gained a reputation as a good writer, and teachers
sometimes asked me to help other students with their writing. Although I was considered
very good in English, I did not feel comfortable speaking it. I spoke as much of it as was
required of me in class, but outside class I spoke Swahili. My discomfort with spoken
English was mostly a fear of slipping and saying something with a Kisii or other
vernacular accent. I worked hard not to let my Swahili or my English be tainted by a
vernacular accent. A mother tongue influenced accent was often reason enough to be
teased and bullied by other girls. In high school for example, the majority of the girls
were Luo, and being a rival neighbor to the Kisii community, Kisiis in the school were
often teased and called names, especially if they had a Kisii accent. Fortunately for me, I
did not have a Kisii accent. My accent was quite neutral, so it was hard to tell which
community I was from just from my accent. As such, even though everyone knew I was
Kisii, I never got bullied for it. But I still had the fear at the back of my mind that I might
accidently say something with a Kisii accent if I tried to speak in English.
As a teacher, I worked at a high school in the heart of Nairobi where vernacular
languages were almost never spoken. The school had both the regular Kenyan 844
education system, and the British system housed under the same roof. The British system
had mostly Indian students while the 844 system had mostly black African students, with
a few Indians. The two systems had separate classrooms, but the students interacted with
each other during break time and lunch time. I worked with form one and form two
students in the 844 system as a French and Literature in English teacher. The students in
118 my classroom spoke a mix of sheng’, English, Swahili, and French during French
lessons. The school had the same English-only policy as most other schools, but this
policy was almost never enforced, except in cases where students spoke Swahili or
sheng’ in a disruptive or disrespectful manner. For example, some students would use
disrespectful sheng’ words for teachers because they believed the teachers did not
understand the language due to the generational gap. In such cases, students would be
caned, or suspended, but not necessarily because they spoke sheng’.
Being a city school, there were not many students that struggled with language.
Language issues were usually connected to discipline issues. There was a tendency
among teachers to have stereotypical beliefs about the students that spoke sheng’. They
were mostly from the East side of the city, mostly from poor backgrounds, and mostly
black African. The Indian students did not speak sheng’. They came from affluent homes,
and were mostly in the British system. Some black African students also came from
affluent homes, and these students tended to speak English, with some of them being in
the British system, and some in the Kenyan 844 system. Teachers’ perceptions of
students’ abilities were highly prejudiced against the sheng’ speaking students from poor
backgrounds.
After my training, and the subsequent time spent in teaching practice, I moved to
the United States to pursue a Masters degree in creative writing. I still wanted to pursue
work in the field of education, and so after graduating from the masters program, I
decided to pursue a doctorate in literacy education.
I became interested in the topic of language and identity because ever since I
came to the United States, I have been constantly made aware of my identity as a “non-
119 native speaker” of the English language, especially given the fact that I am a language
teacher currently studying for a doctorate in literacy education. When I first arrived in the
U.S. in 2007, I could barely understand what anyone was saying. Americans seemed to
speak very fast, faster than what I remembered from watching American shows on TV.
Part of it was being face to face with them and having to communicate with them, as
opposed to the distance that TV creates. They could barely understand what I was saying
either.
Throughout the first few years of being a graduate student in the U.S., I
experienced many moments of doubt that were a result of my accent. My language was
actually fluent, and my writing was good, but I had an accent that often came in the way
of my confidence in expressing myself in front of non-Kenyans. I was that quiet, black
African woman in classrooms that were almost always over 90% white. Luckily, through
the years of being in the U.S., my spoken English became a little clearer, and I developed
the ability to switch accents depending on the context I was in. Additionally, in my
doctoral studies, I was introduced to a rich array of literature on bilingualism and
biculturalism, race, and other topics that opened up my mind to the invaluable assets that
my multilingualism and multiculturalism are. I am no longer as concerned about my
accent when speaking out in public, although inevitably, given the politics of race,
language, and nationality that are pervasive in the United States, I face many situations in
my roles as student and teaching assistant where colleagues and students stereotype and
stigmatize me as an international scholar.
However, when it comes to real life, the issues of language and bilingualism in
the United States are complicated. I am the mother of three children now, including six-
120 year-old twin boys who are enrolled in public schools here in the U.S. Before the twins
started school, we spoke to them exclusively in Swahili. We noticed that the language
barrier made it difficult for them to interact with other children. This became a real
problem once they started school and the teachers expressed concern about their language
skills. Both boys received speech therapy for two years. As their parents, my husband and
I had to make the difficult choice to switch to speaking to them in English rather than
Swahili at home. As much as I had read the literature on the benefits of bilingualism, I
wanted to see my sons succeed in U.S. schools. I wanted them to be able to speak the
language that their friends spoke with a fluency that would afford them confidence
among their peers and their teachers. It became a dilemma of whether we should instill
cultural and linguistic pride in our children by teaching them Swahili, or whether we
should make their lives as American children easier by focusing on their English first. In
considering the options, I was reminded of Delpit (2002)’s words, written about when she
faced a similar dilemma with her daughter suddenly starting to speak Ebonics after
moving to a predominantly African American school:
So when my child’s language reflects that of some of her peers, I feel the eyes of
“the other” negatively assessing her intelligence, he competence, her potential,
and yes, even her moral fiber. So I forgive myself for my perhaps overly
emotional reaction, my painful ambivalence, for I know that it is less a rejection
of the language form created by my people, and more a mother’s protective
instinct to insure that her child’s camouflage is in order when she must encounter
potential enemy forces. (Delpit, 2002, p. 38)
121 We chose to make our Kenyan American children’s lives easier by focusing our efforts
on teaching them English. While my husband and I still spoke to each other in Swahili,
we spoke to the children in English, and with time, they were fluent enough that they did
not need speech services anymore at school. Once we passed through that hurdle with
English, we started to introduce Swahili. The children were mostly amused by the
language, but they were also curious to learn it.
Conducting this study allowed me an opportunity to reflect on these opportunities
and the language choices that I have made for myself and my family through the years. I
regret that I never made a serious effort to learn my vernacular language, Kisii. And that
the language will, in all likelihood, not be passed down to the next generation of my
family. I hope that my efforts to pass Swahili on to my children will be successful. My
experience has been that the reality of the current world sometimes pushes parents to
make choices they believe to be in the best interest of their children, even when
ideologically, they might not be the best choices. In sharing about my background and
positionality, I would like to be upfront about who I am in relationship to this study.
In conducting this dissertation research study, I considered the subjectivities that
might come with my background, and thought about how those subjectivities might affect
my research. As an insider, there was the danger that I might be too close to the
experiences of my participants to really dig deep into their own experiences. In choosing
qualitative interview as the method of inquiry therefore, I was deliberately taking steps to
pick a methodology that would center the participants’ experiences while guarding
against the obstacles to listening (Wengraf, 2001) that might come as a result of my
insider positionality. I kept in mind that I had my own subjectivities in this research as an
122 insider, and as such, I reminded myself every step of the way that my research question
was concerned with the participants’ experiences, whether or not they aligned with my
own, and this ensured that I kept the focus of the study on the participants.
I came into this study with this insider status that offered both advantages and
challenges to my work. One of the advantages was that my insider status made it easy for
me to talk about this topic with the participants. They opened up to me in ways that might
not have been possible with an outsider interviewer. The participants and I had a shared
background that connected us in a mutual understanding of the experiences that they
shared with me in this research. Additionally, once in a while, some participants would
switch to Swahili during the interview, and I would go with the flow, speaking in
whatever language they initiated. All my participants were fluent in English, and the few
times they switched to Swahili, it was usually in an attempt to emphasize a point. In these
instances, during transcription, I transcribed their words in the language they said them in
and then added translations in parenthesis. I was able to quickly establish trust with each
participant, something that might have taken an outsider researcher a longer time to do. I
had a genuine interest in hearing about my participants’ experiences, something that is
crucial in qualitative interview methodology (Seidman, 2013), and I found the process of
interviewing them quite satisfying.
On the flip side, one of the disadvantages that came with my insider status was
that because the participants knew that I understood what they were talking about, they
sometimes neglected to explain what they meant by certain references. And I often had to
ask questions that I already knew the answers to. For example, if a participant told me
that after high school, they were “called to the university to study education”, I already
123 knew that that meant they went to a public university, and education was chosen for them
as a program of study. But I had to ask them to explain it to me in more detail. My insider
status however served me more than it did otherwise, because in addition to helping to
make establishing trust with my participants easier, it made the study more comfortable
and mutually enjoyable for the participants and me.
In her contributions to post-colonial theory, Gayatri Spivak talks about the
subaltern’s voice and the representation of the subaltern voice in research (Spivak, 1994).
As researchers, we are faced with the challenge of how we conduct and represent
research with participants from marginalized communities. We have to question whether
we are highlighting their voices or silencing their voices and promoting the orientalist
colonial agenda of misrepresenting their lives (Said, 1979). Recognizing that I had a
responsibility to my participants, I approached this dissertation study with sensitivity and
a determination to make the process respectful of the participants and their experiences,
in order to avoid falling into the danger of colonizing their voices, as Spivak (1994)
warns in her essay Can the Subaltern Speak?.
Spivak (1994) talks about the third world intellectual in western academies and
questions whether these intellectuals represent the subaltern in ways that allow for the
subaltern to “speak” while making their experiences and interests known, or whether they
only furthur the agendas of their western academy mentors in their representations.
Collins (2004a) also talks about the “outsider within” dilemma of African American
women intellectuals, which often renders them invisible while also serving as a
tremendous source of strength for them as they do the necessary work of resistance that is
needed to remedy the injustices faced by their communities. Faced with the “outsider
124 within” dillema, it is often tempting to suppress one’s difference and comform to the
pressures of the academy to promote dominant ways of knowing, but Collins (2004b)
argues that another option is to use that tension to encourage the institutionalization of
outsider within ways of knowing as well.
As an “outsider within” (Collins, 2004a) in my academic program (being a black
woman from a third world country, and operating within a field that is largely dominated
by white Americans), I went into this research work knowing that I had a great
responsibility to my participants, all of whom can also be said to be outsiders within in
education programs in the United States. It was important to me as a researcher, to ensure
that my representation of the participants’ voices was as genuine and as reciprocal as
possible. While my interviews were semi-structured, I allowed a lot of room for
participants to talk about their experiences on their own terms. If, for example, a
participant was very interested in talking about a particular aspect of the interview at
length, I would let them. And if they did not wish to pursue a certain aspect as closely, I
respected that as well. As a researcher, it was my responsibility to read the body language
of my participants in order to be able to tell what interested them and what made them
uncomfortable. It is worth noting though that all the participants in this study were quite
enthusiastic about sharing their experiences and I almost never had to back away from a
line of questions since the topic seemed interesting to the participants, and our shared
backgrounds made for a comfortable interviewer-interviewee relationship.
I worked to maintain the interest and trust of my participants by trying to make
the experience as flexible and mutually beneficial as possible. For example, I understood
that I was asking a lot by asking them to share their experiences with me. And so, I tried
125 to spend some time chatting informally with them after the interviews. Given our shared
national background, some participants were interested in knowing what my experiences
were regarding the topic of this study. After the interviews, I spent some time chatting
with them, trying to keep the focus on them and their experiences but also cautiously
sharing bits of mine (Seidman, 2013) in order to maintain trust. Lincoln and González y
González (2008) suggest that one of the ways western and non-western scholars can
engage in decolonizing methodologies when working with colonized populations is to
understand the researcher as a living part of the study. They note that
To understand the interpretation of the results, and even to try to get the most of
the meaning from the study, we as readers need to know as many details of the
author’s life and her stance regarding the study. The author, as a living part of the
study, has to introduce himself/herself to the reader, “opening” his/her presence
within the study, giving us some clarity about how the study was developed, how
the analysis proceeded, the results, the participants, and then giving a big and
transparently clear picture of the “story.” (Lincoln & González y González, 2008,
p. 794)
In working to ensure that I was respecting my participants and their experiences, I
constantly reflected on my own positionality in this study. I also decided to include
detailed information about my background in this chapter as a way to acknowledge that
my background was a “living part of the study” (Lincoln & González y González, 2008).
(Seidman (2013) cautions that it is pointless to pretend that the interviewer has no effect
on the interviewing. Instead, he advocates that interviewers should recognize and affirm
the possibilities of their influence as human instruments of the interview process.
126 Qualitative interview recognizes that “the human interviewer can be a marvelously smart,
adaptable, flexible instrument who can respond to situations with skill, tact, and
understanding (Seidman, 2013, p. 26). Furthermore, qualitative researchers manage their
own subjectivity by collecting rich data and reflecting on their positionality within their
studies (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). I recognized my insider positionality to this study and
let that work for me as an asset throughout the research process.
Conclusion
This chapter started off with an introduction where I reiterated the focus of the
study and provided a description of qualitative interview as the method of inquiry that
was used in this dissertation study. I provided a rationale for why I picked qualitative
interview for this study by indicating that qualitative interview is concerned with
participants’ personal experiences and the meanings that they make of those experiences
(Wengraf, 2001), and I pointed out that after reviewing the literature, I discovered that
there was a gap in the literature where teachers’ personal experiences were often not
highlighted. I also provided a rationale for the four domains that are included in the
research question, and explained how the literature informed the formulation of those
domains.
Next, I discussed the participant recruitment and selection processes. I outlined
the criteria that was used to recruit the participants, and noted that ultimately, everyone
that met the criteria, was recruited, and was able to complete the study was selected as a
participant. Ten transnational Kenyan teachers participated in and completed all five
interviews, making a total of fifty interviews for this dissertation study. I provided an
127 introduction of all ten participants that included some biographical information about
each of them.
The next section discussed the data collection processes. I described what each
interview was about and how those interview protocols were created, as well as how and
where the interviews were conducted. I pointed out that because the participants were
spread out in different universities across the country, I conducted some interviews faceto-face, and others on Skype or over the phone. Each interview lasted about an hour. I
also pointed out the ways that the data was transcribed and managed after it was
collected.
A description of the data analysis processes followed. In this section, I provided a
step-by-step description of how I analyzed the data. I explained what I did for each step
and provided examples for how I incorporated the theories that guided this study in the
data analysis process.
Finally, I discussed my own subjectivities in relationship to this dissertation
study. In an attempt to be upfront about my positionality, I provided a detailed account of
my background and the experiences that I have had with the topic under study. Drawing
from various theorists, including Collins (2004a) and Spivak (1994), I explored my
subjectivities as both an insider and an “outsider within” (Collins, 2004a), as well as my
being a third world intellectual in a western academy (Spivak, 1994) in relationship to the
issues of representation in post-colonial research.
The methods described in this chapter resulted in the findings that I will present in
the next two chapters. Chapters four and five are organized by theme, with chapter four
covering the theme of marginalization, and chapter five covering the theme of
128 (re)claiming African languages and identities. The main idea that came from analysis of
data in this dissertation study was that the transnational teachers interviewed experienced
marginalization of their African languages and identities in both the Kenyan and the
United States contexts, but they reclaimed those languages and identities as important
assets in their teaching of literacies in English. Chapters four and five illustrate these
findings.
129 CHAPTER FOUR
“THE WHOLE DAY THEY NEVER OPENED THEIR MOUTH”: THE
MARGINALIZATION OF AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND IDENTITIES IN KENYA
AND THE UNITED STATES
Chapter four explores the theme of marginalization, which was one of two major
themes that emerged from the data in this study. As a theme in this dissertation study,
marginalization refers to the ways in which participants’ identities as speakers of African
languages were suppressed and/or devalued while dominant linguistic and cultural
identities were promoted as superior. In the Kenyan context, participant’s experiences
with linguistic and identity marginalization included the punishing, shaming, and
silencing of African languages in their schools. In the U.S. context, their experiences of
linguistic and identity marginalization included the ways in which participants were made
to feel “less than” because of their cultural and linguistic backgrounds, as well as their
accents.
The theme of marginalization was evident in both the Kenyan and United States
context interviews of all participants. The analysis of data in this dissertation study was
guided by the research question and the theoretical frameworks in this study (postcolonial theories and language imperialism theories), and was done using thematic
analysis. The theories informed the interview protocols, and as a result, the interview
process in itself (and by extension the data collected) was influenced by post-colonial
theories and language imperialism theories. Thematic analysis, as was used in this
dissertation, drew from the work of Boyatzis (1998). I followed his recommended steps
to thematic analysis while ensuring the process was guided by the research question and
130 the theories specific to this study. The data analysis process for this dissertation study is
explained in more detail in chapter three.
During the analysis process, marginalization emerged as a major theme across all
participants’ interviews, and under this theme, the following subthemes were identified:
punishing students’ use of African languages, silencing African languages and identities,
hierarchy of languages and identities, and resisting the marginalization of African
languages and identities. While the theme of marginalization ran across all the
participants’ interviews, each participant had unique experiences as will be evident
throughout this chapter.
This chapter draws on post-colonial theories and linguistic imperialism theories,
which are discussed in greater detail in chapter two, to frame the discussion of the theme
of marginalization of African languages and identities in the Kenyan and United States
contexts. The findings under this theme will be organized by context, with the Kenyan
context coming first, followed by the United States context. Because the data analysis
was conducted using thematic analysis, which is concerned with themes emerging from
the data (Boyatzis, 1998), the presentation of the findings will go back and forth between
the participants’ experiences as students, and as teachers, with themes and subthemes
being the major points of organization. Below, I will begin with participants’
experiences of marginalization in the Kenyan context by discussing the subthemes a)
punishing students’ use of African languages, b) silencing African languages and
identities, c) hierarchy of languages and identities, and d) resisting the marginalization of
African languages and identities.
131 Kenyan Context
“The teachers also used to cane us. If they heard you speak in Kimeru, they would
cane us severely. After that you wouldn’t concentrate well in your studies. So the whole
time you are just thinking about the pain and hating the teacher”(Interview 1 with Sally,
7-5-2014). These words were spoken by Sally, a Special Education teacher from Kenya.
At the time of the interview, she was taking courses at a university in the U.S. while
simultaneously enrolled in a PhD program in Special Education at a university in Kenya.
Sally was narrating her experiences of being severely beaten and shamed for speaking her
mother tongue in primary and secondary school. Sally’s experiences were echoed by
most of the teacher participants in this study. All ten participants in the study experienced
punishment in some form for speaking African languages in their primary and/or
secondary schools in Kenya. For most of the participants, as will be revealed in more
detail below, punishment was by corporal punishment, manual labor, or public
humiliation. But for some, like Eva and Mercy, punishment for speaking their African
languages in school was more covert. For example, Eva went to a high school where
speaking African languages was viewed with contempt, and led the speakers of those
languages being perceived as belonging to a lower social class. In Mercy’s racially
diverse primary school (the student population composed of about two thirds Indian
students, and one third black African students), speaking African languages was
considered “bad manners”, as it was viewed as a way for black African children to
exclude the Indian students in the school. The black African students therefore had to
leave their African languages at home and speak only in English at school, in order for
the Indian children to feel comfortable. These, and other experiences of marginalization
132 will be discussed in the sections that follow. The subthemes that came up under the theme
of marginalization were: punishing students’ use of African languages, silencing African
languages and identities, hierarchy of languages and identities, and resisting the
marginalization of African languages and identities.
Punishing Students’ Use of African Languages
In many formerly colonized African countries, a majority of teachers are
bi/multilingual, as are most people in those nations, but the negative attitudes towards
native African languages conspire to make the instruction these teachers provide continue
the colonial agenda of stripping students of their native identities (Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007;
Wa Thiong’o, 1986). Participants in this study narrated their experiences with teachers
rounding them up for speaking African languages, and then caning, humiliating, or
making them perform manual labor for that “offense”. A common system that was used
to identify students that spoke African languages in the participants’ experiences was the
use of the monto. In the excerpt below, Sally explains how the monto worked in her
primary school when she was a student.
First there was this thing we used to call monto. Monto was like a big piece of
round metal, which was very difficult to hide. And so if you were heard speaking
it, I think it would start with the class prefect at the beginning of the day. So the
first person he hears speak Kimeru gets the monto. If you get the monto, it was so
embarrassing. So you don’t really want anyone to know you have the monto. And
you try as best as you can so that you don’t use Kimeru anymore. And you hide it
and you keep looking out for other people when they talk. You find a group
talking or a pair, if they mention a Kimeru word like this, you just give them and
133 you run away very happy. And the teachers also used to cane us if they heard you
speak in Kimeru. They would cane us severely. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2015)
Sally described the extent of the corporal punishment that was inflicted on them for
speaking Kimeru as being severe. In fact, in the quote at the beginning of this section, she
mentioned that the caning was so severe that the whole day the student would be thinking
about the pain and hating the teacher. To top off the pain from the caning forming a
distraction for the student that lasted throughout the day, the students in Sally’s school
were also forced to find other students to give the monto in order to get rid of the
embarrassment of holding the monto and instead pass it on to somebody else. In addition
to creating bad feelings in the students about their teachers, and potentially creating
animosity among students, this practice took valuable time away from the students that
could have been used more productively on their academics.
The word monto, as explained to me by participants, came from the English word
“monitor”. The “monitor” was used in schools during colonization to monitor those who
spoke African languages so that they could be punished for speaking those languages
(Wa Thiong’o, 1986). This practice continued in schools way after independence, and
still continues to be practiced in some schools today. Gathering from descriptions by
various participants, the monto is often a physical object, such as a piece of wood, a bone,
a piece of metal, or something that is hung around the “language offender’s” neck.
Sometimes it has inscriptions on it to the effect that the holder of that object does not
speak English. The monto worked in similar ways in most participants’ experiences. The
object started off with the class monitor (a student who was given a leadership role
among her peers). The class monitor gave it to the first person they heard speaking an
134 African language. This person passed it on to the first person they heard speaking an
African language, and on and on till the end of the day when the last person to receive it
handed it in to the teacher in charge. The last person to handle it would have to name
whoever gave it to them, and the naming would follow the chain backwards all the way
back to the person that got it from the class monitor. All the “language offenders” would
then be punished by use of corporal punishment, manual labor, or whatever punishment
the teacher chose.
In Kariuki’s secondary school, they had names for people who appeared on the
list of people who spoke African languages in school, as described in the excerpt below:
We used to be caned. And we had a principal whose name was Mr. X (name
changed for confidentiality), and he wouldn’t tolerate you speaking in mother
tongue. So we used to have evening assemblies, being a day school. And you are
tired, you are in a hurry to leave to go home. Those who speak in Kikuyu used to
be referred to as “mother tongue speakers” or “vernacular speakers.” So there
used to be a special list, and woe unto you getting to that list! (Interview 2 with
Kariuki, 9-17-2015)
In this case, the caning was done at the end of the day when students were tired from the
day’s work and were eager to go home. In addition to caning, which Kariuki described as
“the immediate caning, six canes. There was no compromise.” (Interview 2 with Kariuki,
9-17-2015), the teachers in Kariuki’s school also used reading and writing as a form of
punishment, as in the excerpt that follows. This punishment was however reserved for
those that were viewed as likely to be successful enough academically to make it to the
university. The teachers did not expect much from a majority of the students in this local
135 district school, and so for the majority, they were caned and sent on their way while those
viewed as having some kind of potential were given additional punishment. Kariuki
describes this in the excerpt below:
After the caning, you still have to go buy books sometimes. Well, this was more
for those who were let’s say well advanced in English. Like my colleagues who
would do very well, if you were caught speaking in vernacular, then you would be
punished through those means. But those who were, you know like the category
of our school I would say even the society nothing much was expected from the
majority. Not everyone who went there, because it was a local school, would
make it to the university. Only 20 would make it to the university, let’s say at
most. So the rest, nothing much was expected, maybe just go to maybe middle
level colleges. So that intense punishment of reading, writing was rare. That’s
why it was only specific to those who the teachers had a hope that they would
make it to the university. Those ones would get an extra punishment other than
the caning. They would be told, “You know why this is useful for you!” Maybe
write a composition, maybe write an apology letter. (Interview 2 with Kariuki, 917-2015)
In addition to displayed high academic expectation for only certain students while writing
other students off as incapable, the teachers at Kariuki’s secondary school seemed to be
sending the message that competencies in English was expected only of those students
that were likely to succeed academically, and so only those students were asked to read
books and write compositions as punishment. Using reading and writing as punishment is
problematic in itself, but by having different expectations of students in the same school,
136 the teachers in Kariuki’s school were creating a divide that placed some students above
others. Kariuki described these teachers as also asking students to write apology letters
for speaking their African languages, implying that speaking those languages was wrong.
Years later, as a teacher, Kariuki taught at a prestigious provincial school. In this
school, as in the school he had attended as a student, students were caned and made to
write compositions for speaking African languages. But in the school he worked at as a
teacher, the speaking of African languages was rare, as seen in the excerpt below:
They would be caned and caned again. The policy was strict. You would even buy
books. You would write compositions. Caning was instance justice, there and
then. And then a follow-up. In this context, (name of school removed for
confidentiality), there was no monto. And prefects were not kind of following
you. And even speaking in vernacular was rare. And this one, I have found, it all
has to do with context. This was a provincial school, so there is that prestige first.
What is the expectation in the Kenyan school system of a national school? They
would even presume that there is not an incidence of vernacular speaking. These
are students whose expectations are university bound. Professionals. So it is a
training ground. I don’t think there was intentional vernacular speaking. So that is
why the policy is there, if you are caught, but very few victims if any. (Interview
2 with Kariuki, 9-17-2015)
As is evident in this excerpt, there was a clear expectation in the school Kariuki described
above that since it was a prestigious provincial school, students were not to speak African
languages. The students in this school were viewed as professionals who were universitybound, and as such, they did not even need teachers to follow them up about not speaking
137 African languages in school. On the rare occasion that someone did speak an African
language in the school, they are quickly set straight with caning and forced writing
exercises.
Another participant, Jackline, described punishments that ranged from caning to
being made to squat in awkward positions that were meant to embarrass those students
that handled the monto as a result of getting caught speaking African languages in school.
[The punishments included] slashing the field or something. And there was
digging, digging holes for planting things, and maybe for throwing waste or
something. You could be told to wash classes, or you could be given some strokes
of a cane. Or you could be … there was something we used to do, you are asked
to put your hands through here and then you put them here (demonstrates an
awkward squatting position where the hands go through the back of the legs and
then touch the ears). So you stay in that position. (Interview 1 with Jackline, 9-162014)
In addition to being embarrassing, the squatting position was quite uncomfortable, and
staying in that awkward position would require a lot of physical endurance. Jackline did
not question authority when it came to the school’s enforcement of the language policy.
She accepted punishment as an acceptable, and to some extent effective, method of
ensuring students learned English. But her motivation for wanting to learn English was
heavily tied to not wanting to get “that thing”, which refers to the “mbuli”, a local word
that they used to refer to the monto.
I think it was a nice idea. English being the language for instruction, people really
ought to learn how to speak it so that they are able to communicate and
138 understand. So for me, I took it positively and tried to understand it as much as I
could and not to get that thing. (Interview 1 with Jackline, 9-16-2014)
As can be gleaned from this excerpt, Jackline wanted to learn English, and she also
wanted to avoid the punishment that came with getting the mbuli. So she understood the
punishments as a way to try and help students learn English. Additionally, Jackline
viewed speaking African languages in school as a discipline problem among her peers.
She believed that those that kept speaking African languages in school did so out of lack
of concern for the consequences of getting caught, as is evident in the quote below:
Some people were just too much. They held that thing almost every day. They did
not care. So, others were careful but others they did not care. There are people
who are naturally “don’t cares”. So I feel it was just being reckless or something.
(Interview 1 with Jackline, 9-16-2014)
Jackline fell in line as was expected of her when it came to language use in her school.
Because she recognized that the school rules forbade African languages in school, and
that there were consequences for disobeying this rule, she perceived resistance among her
peers as “being reckless”, or having a disregard for authority.
Anzaldùa (1987) argues that linguistic identity is closely tied to one’s sense of
self, and a person’s identity cannot be separated from their language. “Ethnic identity is
twin skin to linguistic identity- I am my language. Until I can take pride in my language,
I cannot take pride in myself.” (Anzaldùa, 1987, p.81). As will be evident in the findings
in the subsequent sections, some of the participants in this study had negative experiences
as a result of the English-only language policy in their schools. Some participants were
139 silenced by this policy while others worked to find ways, including hiding and bribing, to
be able to speak their African languages within their schools.
Silencing of African Languages and Identities
A second subtheme that emerged from the interviews of the participants was the
subtheme of silence. As discussed earlier in this chapter, the participants were often
subjected to physical, and other kinds of punishment for speaking African languages in
their schools. One of the major effects of this that came from the data was that some
participants were silenced. By punishing their use of African languages, the participants
were taught that those languages were inferior, and by extension, as speakers of those
languages, they were inferior.
Scholars have argued that you cannot separate the individual from their language
(see for example Anzaldùa, (1987); Nieto, (2002); Wa Thiong’o, 1986). Therefore, in
teaching a child to despise their language, teachers are failing to value the learners in
their classrooms as people with an identity. Anzaldùa (1987) wrote that “in childhood we
are told that our language is wrong. Repeated attacks on our native tongue diminish our
sense of self. The attacks continue throughout our lives.” (Anzaldùa, 1987, p.80). For
some participants in this study, as will be evident in this section, silence was preferable to
suffering punishment and humiliation for speaking their vernacular languages in school.
The participants all noted that silencing students was likely not the intention of
the teachers in punishing students for speaking African languages in school. Most of their
teachers were simply enforcing a school policy that was set in place in order to get
students to learn and speak English. The teachers perceived vernacular speaking as a
problem, a hindrance to the students’ ability to learn English, and they set out to fix it in
140 order to help their students perform better academically. Unfortunately, as Nieto (2002)
asserts regarding bilingualism in schools where English is the dominant language, “the
problem is defined as fluency in a language other than English. In this case, the major
purpose of education becomes the elimination of all signs of the native language”, p. 82).
Nieto (2002) points out that even well meaning teachers sometimes perceive bilingualism
in their students as a handicap that gets in the way of the students learning the English
language. Intent on ensuring that students muster the English language, which is
indisputably important for educational success in Kenya, the teachers used methods that
had a counterproductive effect on the students’ learning of English. For example, the
monto, discussed earlier in this chapter, rather than enhance the learning of English, in
most cases created fear in the students, because getting it meant one had to look forward
to corporal punishment, humiliation, or manual labor. In one of our interviews, Sally
indicted that in her experience as a student, rather than help her and her fellow students
learn English, the monto made them withdraw and refrain from speaking at all while in
school.
It made them stop talking. But I would say it did not encourage them very much
to speak English. Because what most of the students did was just shut up, not
speaking at all. And there are students who the whole day they never opened their
mouth. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2014)
In another excerpt, below, Sally described herself as having been “ahead” in comparison
to some of her peers when it came to speaking in English. She and other students like her
who were a little more fluent in English, laughed at and ridiculed the students who
struggled. From the information I gathered from Sally’s descriptions of her experiences
141 of how African languages and identities were looked down upon in both her primary and
secondary schools (ironically, because a lot of students still spoke those languages) this
could have been a symptom of the culture that had already been established in the schools
that treated African languages as humiliating and punishable. Sally’s descriptions below
provide a picture of the humiliation that students underwent all day long simply because
of their vernacular-influenced accents.
We would laugh at each other. I remember we used to laugh at each other because
when it came to English words, we were trying to pronounce them as if they were
Meru names. And then we would laugh at each other. They sound very odd. And
then again that made us not feel free to speak out in English because we might be
laughed at or ridiculed. At least some of us were ahead. It was not homogenous.
There are those who I think they learnt faster than others. So they knew probably
how to pronounce this in English. So when the others pronounced it the wrong
way, they would know and then the whole day we would just give… the way you
pronounce a word in a very different way, you would even be given that as your
nickname. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2014)
Speaking with Sally about these experiences, she laughed a lot as she recounted the way
they laughed at and ridiculed each other because of their vernacular-influenced accents.
But although she laughed about it, she was also clear about the way those experiences
silenced them. In the excerpt above, she said that as a consequence of the laughing and
ridicule, they did not feel free to speak out in English. They feared making mistakes in
pronouncing the words, and as such, they avoided speaking in English, which was of
course the language of instruction at her school.
142 In the excerpt that follows, Sally describes that when it came to reading, some
students in her school did not want to read aloud in front of their teachers and peers
because they were fearful of being laughed at. She recounts that the students with
vernacular-influenced accents and those that struggled with the English language came to
dislike English, because for them, their perceived inadequacies in the English language,
which were heavily linked to their African languages, became a source of pain.
It used to weigh very heavily, negatively, on the students. Because now people
stopped, when it came to class participation, like reading in turns. It used to be
very difficult for some students to just read, make an attempt to read. And as they
started reading, you would hear the class just burst in laughter as if they
anticipated how the next word would be pronounced. I realize it never used to be
a good experience. These students never looked forward to English lessons
actually. Most students never looked forward to English lessons, and English was
never popular. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2014)
Evidently then, while what Sally describes above were English classes where students
were supposed to be learning English, the opposite was happening because being made to
shy away from speaking in English was silencing them, and as Sally noted, they did not
even like English lessons. As Nieto (2000) puts it, “[w]hen particular languages are
prohibited or denigrated, the voices of those who speak them are silenced and rejected as
well” (p. 82). When students feel that who they are has been rejected in the English
classroom, it is unrealistic to expect that they will be motivated to learn English. It is
therefore no wonder what Sally pointed out above, that English was never popular in her
143 school. And the teachers did not make it any easier, as Sally narrates in the excerpt
below:
Nyaboke: So what would the teacher do when people were laughing at a student
for pronouncing a word differently?
Sally: They would just get on the student, not those who were laughing. Ok, they
would get concerned if the laughter was very much extended, but then they would
blame the reader for not reading properly. It’s like, “Why can’t you read? The rest
can read!” And actually they would be punished. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-52014)
In addition to the laughing and ridicule that Sally talked about in previous excerpts, in the
excerpt above, Sally added that the teachers in her school also gave similar treatment to
the students that struggled with the English language. Sally recounted that the teachers in
her primary school also participated in the marginalization of students who did not speak
good English. As is evident in Sally’s words above, rather than support those students
and encourage them in their learning of English, their teachers blamed them and punished
them, thus alienating them even further.
Anzaldùa (1987) writes that “because we internalize how our language has been
used against us, we use our language differences against each other.” (p. 80). This
argument is evident in the way the participants’ teachers, as is evident above and in
participants’ recollection of their experiences throughout this chapter, who were
themselves active speakers of African languages, taught students to associate these
languages with shame and academic inferiority. Like in studies conducted by KitokoNsiku (2007) and Chimbutane (2011) in Mozambique where society, including teachers,
144 had internalized the idea that their African languages were only fit for “dogs”, in using
shame to suppress students’ vernacular languages, the Kenyan teachers in participants’
interviews seemed to demonstrate similar disdain for the very languages they spoke and
identified with. This disdain was then projected onto the students as is evident in Sally’
narrative.
Sally went on to describe the insults that teacher threw at students as a
consequence for their silence. Because of the stigma associated with their languages and
accents, the students chose to be silent, but their silence was scorned as well. They were
damned if they spoke, and damned if they didn’t. Sometimes, as in the excerpt from an
interview with Sally that follows, the teachers would resort to speaking in vernacular
themselves while insulting students, although speaking in vernacular or vernacularinfluenced accents was the very reason the students were in trouble in the first place.
Nyaboke: Did the teachers do anything to try and encourage them to speak?
Sally: Not really. It’s like they were already labeled as incapable. So these were
students who were just ridiculed. If anyone talked about them, it’s when they
were ridiculed and even the teachers ridiculed them in the classroom.
Nyaboke: Can you give me an example, like how would they ridicule them?
Sally: They would use like Kimeru names like “kiaa”. “Kiaa” means foolish, a
fool, or a moron. So “kiaa gike” “you fool”.
Nyaboke: And how would the students respond to that?
Sally: Of course they would just withdraw more and sometimes cry. These
students would actually be found at a corner crying…. The teachers would reach a
point where they feel they have now to drive their point home. They would also
145 result to Kimeru, especially when they are annoyed. It’s like this English is not
doing it. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2014)
In the excerpt above, Sally points out that the teachers would call students “fool” or
“moron” when they did not speak due to their limited competencies in English or their
accents when they spoke English. This is consistent with the tenets of post-colonial
theory, whereby the more like the colonizer a person becomes (e.g. by mustering their
language), the more intelligent they are perceived to be. Those that are further away from
the colonial ideal of being as similar to the master as possible, are positioned as being
ignorant, or “fools” as Sally’s teachers called them. Ironically, the teachers themselves
felt that English did not adequately express their sentiments, and so they had to resort to
Kimeru to call the students fools for not speaking out of fear of being ridiculed for
speaking Kimeru or with a Kimeru accent.
The irony of this situation calls to mind Moore-Gilbert’s (1997) observation that
in an attempt to secure their perceived superiority to other peoples and cultures, the West
creates knowledge that presents the Orient as backward, different, exotic, and incapable
of rational thought, while presenting themselves as the opposite. They then advance this
as universal truth, and are often successful in convincing the Orient of their own
inferiority (Fanon, 1952), getting them to join forces with their own oppressors in
oppressing themselves. Kitoko-Nsiku (2007) notes that in Mozambique, the colonizer
worked to convince multilingual Mozambicans that they had the minds of dogs and their
languages were only fit for dogs. Once convinced, the Orient begins to perform the texts
that have been taught to him, and he begins to aspire to be like the colonizer in an effort
to humanize himself (Fanon, 1952). This can be likened to the case Sally recounted above
146 of her teachers insulting students and calling them fools for speaking African languages
or speaking with African accents.
While I have focused on Sally’ interviews in presenting the findings on and
discussing silence in the Kenyan context, hers were not the only interviews with this
subtheme. Most participants talked about either going silent in school, or hiding when
they spoke, so as to avoid punishment for speaking their African languages, which in
some cases came most naturally to them. The ways that the participants resisted the
marginalization of their languages and identities will be discussed in further detail under
the subtheme of resisting marginalization of African languages and identities. Before
getting to that however, the section below presents findings on the hierarchy of languages
and identities as emerged from the data.
The Hierarchy of Languages and Identities
The English language holds an extremely powerful place in education around the
world. Wa Thiong’o (1986) talks about the power of the English language in the Kenyan
education system. He describes the colonial education system in Kenya at the time as
having “the structure of a pyramid: a broad primary base, a narrowing secondary middle,
and an even narrower university apex.” (p. 12). Selection to move up the educational
pyramid was by examinations that are written in English. If one does not muster the
English language, they cannot move up. The process of elimination ensures that only the
elite few (aka those who are able to muster enough English to successfully complete and
pass examinations written in English) get to the top. This system of elimination is
unfortunately still the way Kenyan education is organized. A lot of students fall through
147 the cracks and fail to secure places in secondary schools because of lack of proficiency in
English, which is the language of instruction, and examination.
A consequence of the power of the English language in education in Kenya is that
policies are put in place that criminalize the use of other languages in school. These
policies are evidently remnants of colonial policies that were aimed at stumping out
African languages and cultures by labeling them backward, primitive, and not fit for
humans (Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007). As Nieto (2002) aptly articulates, “privilege,
ethnocentrism, and racism are at the core of policies and practices that limit the use of
languages other than officially recognized high-status languages allowed in schools and
in the society in general” (p.81-82). The result of these policies in Kenyan schools is that
a hierarchy of languages is created, with English at the very top, and African vernacular
languages at the very bottom. As a national language, Swahili lingers somewhere in
between, as it is reluctantly tolerated.
For all participants in this study, African languages were not allowed in school, so
some of them only got opportunities to speak those languages at home, or not at all. For
Mercy, whose native language is Luo, most communication was in English as she grew
up. She went to the same high-end school for both primary and secondary levels, and the
school had students from diverse backgrounds, including Indian students, black African
students, and white students. Speaking Luo in school was not an option, even though
there were other children in the school that had similar linguistic backgrounds. As a
result, Mercy did not have enough opportunities to adequately develop her fluency in Luo
as she narrates in the excerpt below:
148 We realized that when we started going to school, our vernacular was suffering.
So by the time we were grown ups, we used to go upcountry and people would
say that we talk Luo as if we are not Luos. We are talking Luo like people from
another tribe who are learning Luo. So for us that was, the consequence was that
we sacrificed our mother tongue. We continued talking it, but we did not quite
develop like a deep vocabulary, like good vocabulary. And even the Swahili and
the English just took over. The Luo was left more as a way of us communicating
with our parents and that was it.” (Interview 1 with Mercy, 6-15-2014)
Mercy noted that she and her siblings “sacrificed our mother tongue” as they learned
Swahili and English in school. Their mother tongue, Luo, was relegated to a secondary
position, viewed as only a way for them to communicate with their parents. While the
language was viewed as important when they visited their relatives upcountry, and when
they spoke with their parents, beyond that, English was the language that dominated most
of their everyday conversation, in and out of school.
Another participant, Valerie, also had similar experiences. For her, her parents
were highly educated and took her to elite schools in Nairobi. She spoke English fluently
from early on in her life, and although her father made a point to teaching them Luo and
insisting that they speak it, Valerie did not understand her father’s efforts to make her
speak Luo until later on in life. She could speak fluent Luo, but she spoke it with an
English accent. In the excerpt below, Valerie recounts her distress when her mother
yelled out to her in Luo in front of her friends.
I grew up in Kileleshwa and we grew up in a very diverse neighborhood and all
that stuff. It used to be very odd to me when we were outside playing, and we
149 were speaking English, and then you are being called inside to come and do
homework using not only the Luo language, but they also used my Luo name.
And I’d say, “Ok, when I’m out here, it’s Valerie.” But to my mum it didn’t
matter. When you’re being called to the house it is (middle name). So my friends
would make fun of me and say, “you’re going native”. So you see when you have
that peer pressure as a teen in primary school. You want to be known for speaking
English and speaking with the inflections that come with the slang and all that
stuff. (Interview 1 with Valerie, 7-19-2015)
As a young teenager, Valerie did not want to be associated with the Luo language or her
Luo name in front of her friends. Her middle name, which was a Luo name, made her feel
embarrassed in front of her friends and her friends made fun of her for it, remarking that
she was “going native”. At that age, she wanted to be associated with her English name
and with the English language.
The power of the English language is not limited to just either speaking English or
a different language. This power hierarchy extends to accents and varieties of the English
language one speaks (Lippi-Green, 2004). In one of my interviews with Sally, she
recounted how the different accents in English were treated in the high school that she
went to. Like with other schools, the divide was not merely on whether a student spoke
English or African languages. Among students, there were grouping based on where one
came from, and by extension, what variety of English they spoke. The students that came
from large cities like Nairobi were perceived as speaking a superior variety of English
compared to those students that came from rural areas. As is evident in the excerpt below,
150 there was a glorification for the kind of English that the “Born Town” students spoke
because it was not tainted with vernacular-influenced accents.
We had a lot of kids from Nairobi, from rich families. And some could even note
they were Kikuyu, but they didn’t even know how to speak Kikuyu. So probably
us from the village, I think probably kind of admired that. And probably we tried
to emulate them. They used to be called “Born Tao.” Oh, that’s a BT. So you
could just watch them the way they were behaving, like “That’s a BT. Ebu listen
the way she is speaking English.” Then we also start imitating. I think English
was associated with those who were from Nairobi. Probably the interpretation
was, from Nairobi, English. So if we are to look like we come from Nairobi, we
also have to have good English. There was even a name for those who came from
the village. There was, you could actually feel it, you could sense the divide.
Because of the lifestyle. And again when it came to speaking English, the Born
Towns felt superior.” (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2014).
In the above excerpt, Sally notes that the other students worked to imitate and try to
sound like the “Born Towns”, who were perceived as being superior. In an effort to be
viewed in a similar light, the kids from the village tried to speak English in the same way
that they Nairobi kids spoke it. Additionally, some of the Nairobi kids were Kikuyu, but
they did not understand Kikuyu. They were admired and emulated for their English.
Another participant, Eva, went to an all girls national school where the majority
of students were from affluent backgrounds and spoke English exclusively. Eva noted
that there was a discomfort among those students with other students who spoke Swahili.
In my conversations with Eva, I learned that for her, being in a national school, the
151 underlying message was that girls in that school were of a certain class, and that class of
girls did not speak Swahili, or other African languages. In order to fit in, the girls had to
speak English. The excerpt below offers a picture of the language situation at Eva’s
school.
Eva: I used to hear comments from girls, they would say, “Those girls speak
Swahili.” People would be so uncomfortable with those girls who speak Swahili.
So it’s coming out of those people who live in Nairobi.
Nyaboke: What was the discomfort that they had with Swahili?
Eva: Some of them didn’t speak Swahili themselves. But already they are
bringing... most of these kids would have gone to Valley Road, international
schools, or Consolata. Underneath it all, there was a message of class. That if you
spoke Swahili, you came from Eastlands. And if you spoke sheng’ you also came
from Eastlands. You know, the girls in the school did not value speaking Swahili.
Also because they did not grow up with it. And also because it was looked down
upon. And I can imagine in their homes they would hear their parents speaking to
their workers in Swahili. So it was a language they did not value. (Interview 1
with Eva, 7-11-2014).
Eva described Swahili, along with Sheng’, as being perceived in her school to be
indicative of a lower social standing. Speaking those languages betrayed one’s status as
someone coming from Eastlands, which is a part of Nairobi that is inhabited by poorer
people. Being a national school that attracted some of the country’s best achieving
students, and also students from affluent families who went to expensive private primary
schools like those Eva listed, there was an expectation that students in that school were of
152 a certain class, and therefore they were not expected to speak Swahili, let alone other
African vernacular languages. As Eva continues to describe below, the desire to distance
themselves from Swahili and African vernacular languages while embracing English led
the girls to be divided along linguistic hierarchy lines.
There were some girls who went to the same boarding school with me. When we
came to high school, they could never speak to me in Swahili. But there was a
push for you to speak English, and indeed with a British accent even, or with an
American accent. We have never travelled outside the borders of Kenya, so you
spoke English with a little bit of (accent), you know, depending on your
community. Some people have got the influence of their mother tongue. People
would laugh at them. So there was really a push for you to speak English in a
certain diction. It was kind of valued, you know? And it was the tradition of the
school. There was a lot of partitioning of the groups and the languages people
spoke. (Interview 1 with Eva, 7-11-2014).
Eva revealed above that not only was it expected that the girls in that school would speak
English, there was also considerable pressure for them to speak English with an
American or a British accent even though most of them had never been outside the
borders of Kenya. American and British accent were perceived as putting someone higher
up in social class. The girls that had vernacular-influenced accents were laughed at, and
the girls grouped themselves by perceived class, which also had a lot to do with which
languages they spoke, and how they spoke those languages.
When it came to socializing with boy schools, the girls in Eva’s school socialized
with boys from national schools “and those boys wanted you to speak English in a certain
153 way” (Interview 1 with Eva, 7-11-2014). Eva internalized this hierarchy, and even when
she went home, she isolated herself from people she perceived as being of a lower social
class. In our interviews, she described herself as having been a snob. She did not talk to
people who spoke languages other than English, and when someone spoke to her in
Swahili, she answered them back in English.
There were other girls from other families who go to national schools and I saw
they didn’t socialize with everyone. I insisted on talking to these other girls in
English. And some other girls who went to other high schools did not speak
English too, which means they were not fluent. They (other students who went to
national schools) already had a set culture of how you are supposed to be. And
ultimately you are supposed to be a snob. And I participated in that until when I
got to go to college. Then I stopped. So it meant even if a guy talked to me, if
someone was interested in me and talked to me in Swahili, I talk to them back in
English (Interview 1 with Eva, 7-11-2014).
From the excerpt above, Eva felt that there was a script she needed to follow as a national
school student. That script involved picking and choosing who to associate with based on
what language they spoke and how they spoke it. In order to maintain the prestige of
being one of the country’s most elite students by virtue of being in a national school, she
had to speak in English, even when people spoke to her in Swahili. The exaltation of
English, and devaluing of African languages in Kenyan schools is reflected in the Kenyan
society as well. In the following excerpt, Eva observed that in offices, the subordinate
workers tend to speak in Swahili while the upper level employees tend to speak English.
154 In Kenya, I know so well Kiswahili is not… if I went to an office and spoke
Kiswahili to people, I have done an observing that when you are talking to them
and the little ones and the watchman they talk in Kiswahili. But in some levels of
offices and communities, they talk to each other in English. I always say when I
worked in the NGO world in Kenya, I spoke less Kiswahili than I have in the U.S.
to the other teachers of Swahili. I have spoken more Swahili in the U.S. than I did
in Kenya as an adult (Interview 4 with Eva, 7-21-2014)
Eva used the words “the little ones” above to refer to the lower level workers in Kenyan
offices, whom she observed tended to speak Swahili, while the upper level employees
tended to speak English. This observation is a stark reflection of the hierarchy of
languages in Kenya. In fact, although Swahili is a national language in Kenya, Eva
observes that she spoke less Swahili working in Kenya than she has in the U.S. with her
colleagues as a Swahili teacher in a U.S. university.
The participants all expressed that a good mastery of the English language affords
one many opportunities and privileges in Kenya. One participant, Daniel, highlighted the
positive experiences that he has had throughout his life because of his mastery of the
English language. He got opportunities and promotions, and was popular among
colleagues and students because he was not only fluent in English, but also very eloquent
in his speech. Because of the positive experiences that English has afforded him, and
because he would like for his children to have positive experiences making their way
through the world, Daniel was staunch in his belief in the importance of the English
language. However, this belief in English was accompanied by a belief that African
languages were not useful. Rather, as in the excerpt below, Daniel expressed the
155 conviction that African languages serve to diminish a person’s prospects by putting them
in a “small cocoon.”
I would emphasize to my children to know how to speak good English. Is it good
to be able to speak nice Kiembu speeches? Well, yeah, so that you can be like
who? I don’t know. I have never seen. Everyone else is likely to, even the
churches by the way, they are just changing. Things are changing. Even public
places will no longer be like single language areas, you know? So I feel like it’s
language, English, not language, English is…. The more a language cuts across,
the better you need to be in it. The more a language brings you to a more sealed
and small cocoon, the further away I think you should get from it. (Interview 1
with Daniel, 6-2-2014)
The idea that African languages bring you to “a more sealed and small cocoon” that
Daniel expresses in the excerpt above shows the suppression of African languages that
happens by the propagation of myths about African languages (Orwenjo, 2012), which
often have the effect of keeping African languages at the bottom of the linguistic
hierarchy in an effort to promote dominant languages like English. Not unlike Said’s
(1979) arguments about orientalism, which involves the misrepresentation of othered
communities and their cultures by dominant communities, the misrepresentation of
African languages as placing their speakers in “sealed and small cocoons” is
characteristic of modern day colonialism. As a remnant of colonization, and a reflection
of neo-colonialism of the mind, Africans internalize the ideas of the colonizers that their
languages and cultures are backward, and they enact those beliefs in their treatment of,
and their attitudes toward, African languages.
156 The experiences of participants in this study showed, as previously illustrated,
that their schools often perpetuated the colonial practice of devaluing their African
languages in an effort to promote their learning of English. Teachers in Kenyan schools
are often tasked with the responsibility of ensuring students speak English in schools
(Orwenjo, 2012). Some parents also insist on their children speaking English as much as
possible, especially in school. As studies by Tembe and Norton (2008), Jones and
Barkhuizen (2011), Campbell and Walsh 2010, and Kitoko-Nsiku (2007) show, a lot of
parents in post-colonial African nations believe that in a world that is becoming more and
more globalized, it is important that their children become as good in English as possible,
even if that means sacrificing, or relegating their African languages to a secondary
position, in order to achieve that end.
As a parent of two Kenyan children, currently living in Kenya, Daniel similar
beliefs. Daniel felt that his African language, Kimeru, was “nice” but not important in the
current world. He felt that rather than spend time teaching his children Kimeru, he would
rather teach them Chinese, as he believed Chinese is the language of the future, alongside
English. Daniel emphasized that he would want his children, currently in primary and
secondary schools in Kenya, to learn Chinese for “the commercial bit of it” (Interview 1
with Daniel, 6-2-2014). He stated that the world is changing and therefore, “you want to
prepare your children for their time, not for your time, you know? The future is likely to
have a lot of Chinese. Yes, and it might be important to be able to cross between English
and Chinese” (Interview 1 with Daniel, 6-2-2014).
Daniel had a lot of positive experiences with the English language as it afforded
him privileges and high social status throughout his life and career. On the other hand, he
157 had a number of negative experiences with his African languages, including problems
with his father when he brought home a wife that spoke a different African language, and
problems with his peers during his undergraduate training because of his accent.
Throughout all five interviews with Daniel, he was passionate about putting distance
between himself and his African language while emphasizing the importance of English
in today’s world. On occasion, he questioned himself on whether his beliefs were right,
and pointed out that he had not given the topic a lot of thought before, and that it was
possible he might feel differently in the future. But for the duration of this study, he took
a firm stand with few contradictions in the ways that he represented his experiences.
In contrast to the high regard in which the participants felt the English language is
held in Kenya, they also noted that speaking African languages is often thought to be not
just wrong, but also insulting, as will be illustrated by Kariuki’s experiences below.
Kariuki, recounted the push back that he received for speaking Kikuyu with colleagues as
a teacher.
You will find that people get irritated or pissed off like, “Why are you speaking in
your mother tongue?” But people have this idea that when you are speaking, you
are either discussing them or that notion. But for me, I am just having this
conversation. And I feel like I am communicating more with that colleague. So
why should I, if it’s not an official duty we are undertaking, or we are just having
a cup of tea, why shouldn’t we have the freedom to converse with our language?
And for me, if you ask me what language I am comfortable conversing with in
terms of conversation, I would say Kikuyu. So I love the language. I like the
proverbs because even the proverbs, you know, there is a way I found they
158 communicate with me so much. And there is so much counseling in the Kikuyu
proverbs, and they used to entice me. (Interview 1 with Kariuki, 6-14-2014)
Kariuki pointed out that people erroneously assumed that when someone spoke a
language they did not understand (due to coming from different linguistic communities),
then they were talking about or backbiting them. On his part though, he believed that if
he was just relaxing and not conducting official business, he should be able to speak
Kikuyu, his most comfortable language, without being chastised for it.
The speaking of African languages is sometimes erroneously linked to tribalism
(Orwenjo, 2012). After the 2007 post-election violence in Kenya, and even before that,
speaking African languages in public places to some extent became politicized as
different communities became untrusting of other communities. Speaking African
languages in government offices in Kenya was recently forbidden, and everyone is now
expected to speak in either English or Swahili in government offices. Even prior to the
outlawing of vernacular languages in government offices, in some cases, especially in
cities where there is a mix of workers from different linguistic backgrounds, speaking
African languages in the work environment was sometimes frowned upon. As Kariuki
pointed out above, when one speaks their African language in the office, sometimes
people take offense to it, especially if they don’t understand the language. When a group
speaks together in a shared African language, other people that do not understand the
language are bound to feel left out, and so those speaking the language could be accused
of tribalism. However, while decrying the common practice in Kenya of linking African
languages to tribalism, one participant, Isaac, emphasized that tribalism is more about
politics than language.
159 I believe politics have influenced all these aspects. Because given that most
politicians would use tribalism because it is tribalism that helps them to, I think,
galvanize their bases, which are their communities. It originates more from the
rich, the elite, who are well off. The only problem with them is that they do it just
for their personal gains, their political positions. When you see them in the city or
when seen together with people from different communities, and you see them
like they are easily integrating. And probably even in the city, in the estates where
they are living, different communities are staying there and they are in harmony.
But they are the same people who used to get the same tribal aspects when they
go out of the city to the rural areas.” (Interview 5 with Isaac, 7-19-2014)
In the excerpt above, Isaac notes that politicians promote tribalism for their own selfish
gain, because they need tribalism to exist in order to garner votes based on their tribal
affiliations. To paraphrase Isaac’s words, motivated by their own political interests,
politicians stir up divisions among communities (which naturally get extended on to the
languages those communities speak), and the communities consequently take issue with
each other and with each other’s languages.
Orwenjo (2012) argues that the myth that African languages are the cause of the
problem of tribalism in Kenya is not only false but also damaging to the country, as it
creates negative ideologies about these languages, which then prevents schools and
teachers from exploring the possibilities of using these languages to enhance students’
learning.
The fear of tribalism that leads some people, like Kariuki’s colleagues in Kenya,
to be upset by people speaking African languages in Kenya, is misplaced when it is
160 linked to African languages. This, and other negative ideologies about African languages,
perpetuate the colonial agenda as described in Wa Thiong’o (1986)’s book on the
colonization of the mind, which continues way past the actual physical colonization is
over. Kenya has been independent from British rule for over 50 years, but this
undermining, shaming, and humiliation of students’ native languages and cultures is an
ongoing phenomenon in schools (Muthwii, 2004; Maeda, 2009). As has been illustrated
in this section, the participants experienced a hierarchy of languages in their schools in
Kenya, which exalted English as the language of academic and economic success, while
devaluing Swahili and other African languages as being less useful and less desirable.
Resisting the Marginalization of African Languages
The first three subthemes discussed above, under the theme of marginalization,
have had to do with the ways that the participants recalled being punished for speaking
African languages, the silence that resulted from those practices of punishment, and the
hierarchy of languages that they felt was propagated by all this. In this section, and as a
fourth subtheme, I will present findings on the ways that participants resisted the
marginalization of their African languages and identities, both as students and as
teachers.
Despite the physical punishment, the manual labor, and the humiliation that
students suffered as a result of speaking African languages in school, some students still
found ways to speak those languages. They went to great lengths to find spaces where
they could speak their languages, even with the ever-present danger that someone might
hear them, and they might be punished for it. In the excerpt below, for example, Jackline
161 describes how her peers would hide in secluded areas just so they could speak their
vernacular languages.
Some could go during games time and hide in some secluded places and speak
their mother tongue without anybody noticing them. But it was a requirement that
whether you are inside class or outside you need to speak in English (Interview 1
with Jackline, 9-16-2014).
Although it was games time, a time when students are supposed to be outside playing and
having fun, Jackline points out that some students spent that time in hiding so that they
could speak their language. And this was after spending all day in the classroom, forced
to speak English. Because the language policy required them to speak English whether
they were inside or outside the classroom, they chose to sacrifice their games time so that
they could hide and speak their language.
Similarly, in Isaac’s primary school, students came up with ways to protect
themselves from the humiliation, pain, and suffering that was bound to befall them when
they were caught speaking the languages that came naturally to them. As Isaac explains
in the excerpt below, some students even resorted to bribing other students in order to
avoid punishment for speaking their African languages.
Sometimes even the person who has it, you’d rather bribe him or her so that you
are not given the button to pass to the next person. So that you are not in the line.
So those were some of the things you do. Or befriend the class monitor, bribe,
more or less of bribe. You buy a few things. I remember those days some of the
key things we used to like, we used to buy sugar cane, what else? Mandazis used
162 to be sold around. So if you could afford one or two, and you give to the class
monitor so you may skip for a day or so.” (Interview 1 with Isaac, 7-2-2014)
Isaac recalled that the students in his school learned to manipulate the system to avoid
punishment. Because the enforcement of the language policy relied heavily on students
reporting each other to the teachers, they found that they could make friends with the
class monitor (usually a student given some authority over their peers in the classroom),
or bribe them with food. They could also offer to buy some treats for whoever had what
Isaac refers to as “the button”, which is basically the monto, in order to escape being put
on the list of those who spoke vernacular languages, even just for a day. The actions of
the students in both Jackline’s and Isaac’s school are powerful, because the students were
choosing to resist the marginalization of their languages and their identities. They were
choosing to find ways around the system so that they could enact their African identities
while avoiding the punishment that came with it.
Ironically, although teachers went to great lengths to implement the language
policies in their schools, which forbade the speaking of African languages, the teachers
themselves could not adhere to this policy. In both the primary and secondary school
contexts for most participants, they remembered their teachers speaking African
languages on a regular basis when they did not think the students were within earshot.
Jackline pointed out that in her primary and secondary schools, teachers struggled with
the English language as well. In speaking English, the risk of humiliation was equally
present for the teachers as for the students. Students would laugh at teachers when the
teachers attempted to speak English and ended up making pronunciation mistakes due to
mother tongue interference. Students were however fearful of the teachers, and so they
163 felt the freedom to laugh at the teachers’ language mistakes only in the anonymity of
crowds. Jackline explains this in the excerpt below:
In high school, students used to really laugh. And especially if we are in the
assembly and somebody, a teacher made an announcement and did not speak
correctly. People could laugh. But you see that is a crowd. You could not know
who exactly was laughing. But in class, people could just keep quiet and maybe
talk about it later.” (Interview 1 with Jackline, 9-16-2014)
Because, as Jackline pointed out above, the teachers had some of the same issues
expressing themselves in English that the students had, there was a sense of
understanding in some cases. Unlike in Jackline’s case where the students laughed at the
teachers when they made vernacular-influenced mistakes when speaking English, Isaac
paints a different picture in the excerpt below:
I wouldn’t even give credit to the teachers. Even the teachers used to struggle.
Okay, they were definitely much better than the students, but even they were not
as fluent as they were expected to be. So people understood. We understood each
other. They understood the difficulties because them they weren’t as good. As
much as they would emphasize on people speaking it, they knew the difficulties.”
(Interview 1 with Isaac, 7-2-2014)
Because, as illustrated by Jackline’s and Isaac’s experiences above, English was difficult
even for the teachers, the allure of the mother tongue was always present for both
students and teachers alike.
Years later, as teachers, the participants found themselves on the other side of the
language policy enforcement struggle. Participants recounted that they quickly found out
164 that even as teachers expected to enforce the schools’ language policies, they still felt the
pull of their African languages. They could not help but speak their African languages
themselves when conversing with colleagues who shared their vernacular language
backgrounds.
Kariuki and Isaac noted that as teachers, when they were just “relaxing”
informally in the staffroom with other teachers, speaking in their African languages (and
Kiswahili in some cases) felt more natural. English was viewed as more formal and
appropriate for formal events like staff meetings. The rest of the time, teachers fell back
to the languages that came naturally to them, as Isaac explains below:
Our staff meetings, we were formal. We spoke English during staff meetings.
Informal gatherings in the staffroom, we are talking to each other, normal issues,
that was predominantly Swahili. Even though a few cases of English were there.
And then you’ll always see people who come from the same community will
always have that opportunity to speak their mother tongue. You could see,
especially upcountry, it is so common with upcountry people than it is with coast
people mainly because people even speak Swahili if you come from the same
community. But mainly upcountry you will always find Kikuyus speak Kikuyu.
(Interview 3 with Isaac, 7-11-2014)
To explain some of the references in Isaac’s excerpt above, coastal people, like Dennis,
often refer to all other parts of the country as upcountry. This has nothing to do with a
place being rural or urban, but is rather just a term they use for non-coastal people. Being
from a coastal community, Isaac spoke Swahili as a mother tongue. His mother tongue,
Duruma, is one of the languages, like Swahili, that fall under the Mijikenda language. As
165 such, Swahili is often used among Mijikenda speakers as a mother tongue. So, for Isaac,
Swahili was the language he spoke informally in the staffroom, while some of his
colleague from other communities spoke in their respective mother tongues as well. In
the excerpt that follows, Karuiki expressed the same sentiments about their language
practices when he was a teacher in Kenya:
Teachers speak, like back home, they speak in vernacular. The normal
conversation, staffroom conversation, it was hard to find teachers speaking in
English or Kiswahili. Even the language teachers themselves, it’s like, okay it is a
relaxing mode. So English is like formal. (Interview 2 with Kariuki, 9-17-2014)
As Kariuki pointed out, even the language teachers spoke their African languages
informally in the staffroom, because they felt that those languages were the appropriate
languages for “relaxing mode”. Although, as teachers, they could not extend the same
courtesy of allowing students to speak their African languages when they were in
“relaxing mode”, they did recognize that there could be a space in the school context for
African languages, hence their having no problem speaking those languages in school.
Echoing Isaac and Kariuki’s observations, Faith asserted in the excerpt below that as
teachers, they found it difficult to speak in English while in the staffroom.
Although now as a teacher you really want to emphasize to your student and you
want to set that good example, you cannot just keep on talking in vernacular. But
let me say it’s not easy. It’s not easy. Because I remember even in the staffroom
where teachers could meet and sit together, majority being Kikuyus, we found
ourselves just speaking in Kikuyu. And I think it is very, very common, especially
in average schools. (Interview 2 with Faith, 6-19-2014)
166 When Faith said that “you cannot just keep on talking”, she was referring to the difficulty
in speaking English all the time. The teachers, including Faith, “found ourselves”
speaking in Kikuyu, thus illustrating the natural, and sometimes involuntary, nature of the
act of speaking one’s native language.
In the last sentence of Faith’s excerpt above, Faith linked the speaking of African
languages to “average schools”. From the data analysis, it was evident that the speaking
of African languages among students, and teachers, in schools was more common in the
interviews of participants that went to or taught at district and provincial schools than
those that went to or taught at national schools or elite private schools. This is evident
throughout this chapter in looking, for example, at the experiences of Eva and Mercy on
the one hand (as participants that went to elite schools), and Sally and Kariuki on the
other (as participants who went to more regular schools). Despite the discrepancy in how
African languages were viewed and treated, which is discussed in the section on the
hierarchy of languages, it is still evidently clear that in some ways, some teachers were
pushing back against the marginalization of African languages and identities, even as
they participated in the suppression of these languages among their students. In most
district and provincial schools, both teachers and students spoke African languages in
school, and although students were punished for it, it was understood that those
languages were there to stay.
Faith suggested, as seen in the excerpt that follows, that teachers should rethink
the idea of trying to get student to move away from their African languages in an attempt
to get them to speak English or Swahili.
167 I remember during the staff meeting, one of the staff meetings, we were like “If
we always speak in our mother tongue, and here we are we want our students to
speak in English or Kiswahili, what picture are we portraying to the students?” So
it has really been a challenge. As much as we try to tell people to shun away from
speaking their mother tongue, it is not always easy because we were really here
emphasizing to our students to use these languages in their classroom sector, but
even they could pass by and hear us speaking vernacular, you know? And we
could try not to speak in vernacular but we were finding ourselves speaking it. It’s
a challenge.” (Interview 3 with Faith, 6-24-2014).
Faith articulates in the excerpt above that it is not easy giving up an important aspect of
one’s identity, such as one’s mother tongue, and as such there will be push back and
resistance when schools, and teachers, take the approach of trying to force students to
give up their mother tongues in order to learn English. Faith notes that even the teachers
themselves understood how difficult it was to completely shed one’s mother tongue in
favor of another language, even when there were severe consequences for speaking the
mother tongue.
In the above section, I have presented findings from the Kenyan context under the
theme of marginalization. In the section that follows, I will present findings from the
United States context under the same theme. The subthemes that emerged under the
theme of marginalization in the United States context were: becoming raced, linguistic
and racial stereotyping in the U.S., silencing of African languages and identities, and
responses to marginalization.
168 United States Context
In this section of chapter four, I will present findings from participants’
experiences with language and identity in the United States. The theme of
marginalization came through as strongly in the U.S. context as it did in the Kenyan
context, with participants sharing experiences about the ways that they felt marginalized,
isolated, and silenced as students and as teachings assistants in U.S. university
classrooms. Under the theme of marginalization, the subthemes identified in the U.S.
context interviews were: becoming raced, linguistic and racial stereotyping in the U.S.,
silencing of African languages and Identities, and responses to marginalization. Below, I
will present findings from each of these subthemes.
Becoming Raced
While race might be one of the most obvious markers of identity for a lot of
people, for the participants in this study, race did not rank very high in their definitions of
themselves before they came to the U.S. Because most of them (with the exception of
Mercy) did not have much contact with other races growing up and working in Kenya,
and because race is generally not an issue or a construct most Kenyans have to think
about on a day-to-day basis, the idea of being defined and sometimes stereotyped based
on the color of their skin was foreign. Faith shared some thoughts on this:
As far as race is concerned, I didn’t have much experience. Because I had not
really met so many people from different races. Maybe from other tribes, that one
I was like very open to all people after leaving my undergrad. And even in my last
working station, I worked with teachers from other tribes. So that one kind of
169 opened me to other tribes. But for the races, I didn’t have such, you know, much
experience. (Interview 3 with Faith, 6-24-2015)
Faith came from a rural background, surrounded mostly by people from her own
community, the Kikuyu community, for most of her childhood. As she points out above,
while in Kenya, during her undergraduate and after, she was exposed to working closely
with people from other communities, and that opened her up to other “tribes”. But even
then, she never had experiences with people from other races before coming to the U.S.
Similarly, as expressed in the excerpt below, another participant, Daniel, did not give
much thought to race prior to coming to the U.S.
I have never thought about race until I came to the U.S. Have I ever interacted
with a white person before? Yeah, just a bit. I had the same curiosity. It’s just
recognizing that this is different from me…. I had never seen myself as lower
than anyone. When I came here I was almost like neutral. To me, I find like it’s
normally a good point to start with, at the point where you have not seen anything
good or bad about this. So let’s start there until you see. (Interview 1 with Daniel,
6-2-2014)
Although Daniel had had some interaction with white people before, the extent of his
thought on race at that point in his life was just curiosity. He used the words “I had never
seen myself as lower than anyone” to describe his perception of himself with regards to
race at that point. He saw himself as being equal to everyone else, and was “almost like
neutral” to the issue of race in the U.S. By neutral, Daniel meant that since he had not had
any good or bad experiences that he attributed to race at that point, he was not making
any judgments as to whether or not racism was a problem he would face in this country.
170 With time though, Daniel did face situations where he was treated a certain way because
of his race, as he narrates in the excerpt below:
So I have seen expressions, I have seen actions that actually try to bring me down.
I know I can’t go down and I feel pity for that person. I actually feel sad for that,
you know? So I have seen it, I have worked with a person for one year and three
distinct episodes that you can tell, Jesus, this guy still thinks this way, you know?
And I have a lot of pity for him. But it doesn’t make me feel bad or it doesn’t
bring me down (Interview 1 with Daniel, 6-2-2014)
Daniel was referring to a white colleague of his who tried on several occasions to
undermine him because of his race. This colleague, although they were both doctoral
students at the same level, treated him as a subordinate, and would sometimes contradict
him in front of students. In saying, “Jesus, this guy still thinks this way?” Daniel implied
that he had previously thought that racism was over in the U.S., and that people no longer
thought a certain way about other people based on their race. Because of this, Daniel
found his colleague’s behavior surprising, as is evident in the expression referenced
above.
Not unlike Daniel, Valerie was also surprised when she first arrived in the U.S.
and found that she suddenly had to take on and be a part of a history she had previously
not been a part of. Valerie’s quote below explains this:
I think the way was for me to realize that the environment that I had come to
study was not the ideal place for an international student coming to study in the
college of education. It made me feel like I had accidentally been part of a history
that I had no control over. For me to study here, I had to take ownership of that
171 history and educate myself. I was very educated on the race issues and all that.
But it is one thing speaking about it, and another thing living in it. So it made me
realize that I was not just here for a book education but a life education. Knowing
how to survive in this new environment with all its nuances that have to do with
race or class and all that stuff. (Interview 4 with Valerie, 7-28-2014)
Valerie found herself in the middle of a history (the history of race and racism in the
U.S.) that she felt she “had no control over,” and she felt that in order to survive here, she
had to educate herself in that history and “take ownership” of it. While she had had a lot
of knowledge about race prior to coming to the U.S., she was now “living in it” and that
proved to be a whole lot different than simply knowing about it. She realized that she was
about to get a “life education” in the U.S., and it was not long before some of that life
education presented itself. In fact, as Valerie narrates in the excerpt below, as soon as she
landed in the U.S., she had some realizations about how she was perceived:
So landing in Cleveland and having to realize for the first time that, talking, that I
have a Kenyan accent. I’m a minority. So everything in my entity that may not
have been awakened was awakened by other people’s perception of who I might
be. So the first impression was, wow everything is big in this country. It is
amazing! The cars are wonderful. That very quickly dissipated to what the hell am
I doing here? I am not in control of my environment! I have to constantly keep
explaining who I am. (Interview 4 with Valerie, 7-28-2014)
One of the first realizations that Valerie made regarding how she was perceived was that
she had a Kenyan accent. This was news to her because in Kenya, she did not perceive
herself as having an accent. In fact, Valerie was one of the participants, along with Eva
172 and Mercy, who went to elite schools, and as such, spoke very fluent English with almost
no vernacular influence at all. It therefore came as a shock to her when the excitement of
arriving in the U.S. quickly turned to a panic at being in a new environment that she did
not fully understand. For Valerie, the reality of being identified in terms of race, the idea
of who she was being something that needed explaining, and being considered a
“minority”, were all new and somewhat unsettling.
As illustrated by Faith, Daniel, and Valerie’s experiences above, becoming raced
was a disconcerting reality for participants once they arrived in the United States. Not
only did their skin color become one of the most note-worthy aspects of their identity, but
their language and accents also came into the spotlight as different, and as will be seen in
the subtheme that follows, lacking.
Linguistic and Racial Stereotyping in the United States
A second subtheme under the theme of marginalization that came through
strongly in the participants’ U.S. context interviews was the subtheme of linguistic and
racial stereotyping. I coded under linguistic and racial stereotyping instances where
participants talked about the ways that they were perceived in the U.S. based on their
linguistic and racial backgrounds. As will be revealed in the experiences below,
participants talked about experiencing prejudice, deficit assumptions, and sometimes
even hatred, based on their linguistic and racial background. Although the expression of
prejudice and racism was not always overt, participants were highly aware of it. In the
excerpt below, Daniel talks about the “silent prejudice” that he experienced:
I have a problem with the silent prejudice, things that people have in their hearts. I
can see it, but they are not so conscious to tell me. But I can see it in the eyes, you
173 know? I can feel your hatred. You’ve not really said you hate me. I don’t know
how to react to that. And I’ve started seeing it, especially when I started teaching,
especially because the person I was working with could show it. I think that is the
first time I have experienced it. I tried to complain about it and two people, one
person told me “hao watu achana nao” (Translates to: Those people, leave them
alone). That was a friend who is also in grad school having similar identical issues
and is teaching. All right, so I also asked an American friend of mine and they
told me, “You know Daniel, you have to fight for yourself.” That was a very good
statement that was the best advice. So I learnt how to fight for my space. And I
can tell that this prejudice is just alive. It’s just that some people have learnt how
to block it at the mouth of the tongue, you know? They just swallow it, but it was
already in the mouth. (Interview 4 with Daniel, 6-17-2014).
At this point, when Daniel started teaching, he had his first experiences with racism.
Whereas earlier in this chapter, Daniel described himself as having been “neutral” in
regards to the issues of race in the U.S. when he first arrived in the country, having not
seen anything good or bad yet, at this point, he was beginning to see racism manifested in
his relationship with his colleague. Although the colleague never said outright that he
hated him, Daniel said “I can feel your hatred.” It was clear to him in the way that his
colleague treated him that he was prejudiced against him.
Additionally, when Daniel complained about this to a Kenyan friend who was
experiencing similar issues in their own teaching, the friend advised him to leave “those
people” (meaning white people) alone. This is a stance, as will be discussed in more
detail later in this section, that many participants took when faced with racism. They
174 often chose not to speak up about their frustrations around issues of perceived racism. On
the other hand, when he confided in an American friend about the racism that he was
facing, the American friend advised him to fight for himself. Americans have had more
experience dealing with racism, and fighting against it, and as such, the contrast in the
approaches of Daniel’s Kenyan friend and his American friend is telling of how they
perceived and reacted to racism. Gibson & Ogbu (1991) note that Africans may
downplay racism because they see America as a land of opportunities for them, and as
such, they are more willing to avoid speaking up against, or directly confronting issues of
racism, in order to focus on pursuing their interests in the United States.
Another participant, Faith, was often distressed by the racism she faced from her
students as a teaching assistant. She felt that once some students heard her accent, they
brushed her off and did not make any attempt to try and learn from her. Below is an
excerpt from one of our interviews where she talks about this:
Faith: It (teaching in the U.S.) has been another training ground for me, and
especially to learn to listen to students who majority come from USA. And it was
not easy at first for me. Because I felt that I don’t know whether I will go and
attend this group, try to explain to them. And at times you also realize they have
some attitude sort of. Some attitude towards the accent that I’m using. So it has
not really been easy. But I keep on encouraging myself and try to use my English
and just help them.
Nyaboke: Tell me about this attitude that they have towards your accent.
Faith: I think you just note, you know? You just know how they behave. Like
when you are trying to explain to them something they are like they are not there.
175 It’s like they want to brush you off, you know? It’s like they are telling you, we
are fine. Like they really want you to move on and leave them. You know that
sort of an attitude. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014).
In the excerpt above, Faith recounted her initial nervousness about teaching “this group”
of students, which was made up of mostly American students. She observed that the
students had “some attitude towards the accent that I’m using.” Faith followed this by
taking a step back and saying that despite this observation, she just kept encouraging
herself and using her English to try and help her students. When I asked that she tell me
more about the attitudes that she felt her students had towards her accent, she drew me in
as an insider to the experience of being a black, African international student in a U.S.
university by saying “You just know how they behave,” implying that I must also have
had similar experiences. Faith went on to explain that her students often brushed her off,
and did not pay attention when she was trying to explain something to them. Instead, they
would act like they were fine and they just wanted her to move on and leave them alone.
Another participant, Mercy, had similar experiences in her teaching. I asked
Mercy what her experiences with race have been in her teaching in the U.S., and she gave
me an example of student behavior that she perceived as racist. Given the choice between
her and another tutor, the students in the class for which she worked as a teaching
assistant would avoid her and walk straight to the white tutor for help. Mercy described
this in the excerpt below:
Sometimes a white student would walk in, and if they find me and a white tutor in
the lab, they will walk straight to where the white tutor is. It’s like if it’s a choice
between me and the white tutor, they will go to the white tutor. It may happen that
176 if they lift their hand and I go to them, they will not tell me, “No go away, I want
the white.” They won’t say that. But if they walk in, usually because they find us
seated at different positions, we all just sit randomly. So I noticed when they walk
in and they find a white tutor, they will walk straight to the white tutor. Between
me and the white tutor, they walk straight to the white tutor. (Interview 4 with
Mercy, 6-28-2014)
Mercy noted that she was often bypassed by white students in favor of white tutors when
the students had a choice, especially in the lab setting where students walked in and there
were several tutors to choose from. She recognized the act of students bypassing her as a
commentary on her race, a sign of the preconceptions that they had about her based on
racial stereotypes. Like the other participants in this section, Mercy noted that the racism
was covert. For example, she observed that in the classroom situation, if a student raised
their hand up for help and she walked over to help them, they wouldn’t refuse her help in
favor of a white teaching assistant. But in the lab, they could display covert prejudice by
walking past her to choose a white tutor when they needed help.
Another participant, Nicole, also echoed similar experiences of people brushing
her off once they heard her accent, even though, in her case, they had initially approached
her for assistance. The excerpt that follows is from one of my interviews with Nicole.
Some of the people might not tell you directly that they are racists. But you can
see how they behave. For example, if you ask a question, how they respond to that
question tells you there is something that is deeper than just the question you
asked. So other times you meet somebody and you are asking for directions, and
maybe it is on the street and they tell you they have no time. Or somebody is
177 asking for directions, and when you start explaining, go right, turn left, then they
realized I don’t seem to understand this accent. They say, “Oh thank you. I have
got it.” And then they start walking away, and when you turn they are asking the
next person. (Interview 4 with Nicole, 9-4-2014)
Much like Daniel’s, Faith’s, and Mercy’s experiences, Nicole also noted in the excerpt
above that although the racism that she experience was not overt, she could see it in how
people responded to and behaved towards her. She gave the example of either her asking
for, or someone asking her for directions on the streets. In both cases, she was ultimately
brushed off. In the cases of someone asking her for directions, they would quickly thank
her and walk away once they heard her accent, only to ask the same question to the next
person.
While racism was obviously a problem for all participants, some participants, like
Faith, took the stance that they did not have to “note it” or pay much attention to it. As
Faith notes in the excerpt that follows, racism was “an issue, but we don’t really note it.”
But even while trying to not to pay attention to it, it was a part of how Faith was
perceived at her U.S. university, as she explains below:
I think that (racism) is an issue but we don’t really note it. But you realize at times
like people can just look at you and they don’t want to talk to you so much. I
don’t know whether it is the culture of this place. And you just realize that at
times it has been hard, like they really want to keep to themselves. The whites
want to keep to themselves, the African Americans want to keep to themselves,
the international students from other nationalities want to keep to themselves. And
it has not really been easy interacting all along. So you realize there are some
178 people who will look at you to see that you are black. Sometimes they even think
that you are still black maybe when it comes to thinking (Interview 4 with Faith,
6-28-2014).
In this excerpt, Faith points to the groupings that she observed around her in the U.S. The
whites kept to themselves, as did the African Americans, and other international students
from other places. Faith also observed that people looked at her as an African
international student and “they don’t want to talk to you so much.” She attributes this
isolation to her black skin, which she believes some people “even think that you are still
black maybe when it comes to thinking.” In saying this, Faith is alluding to the idea that
the color black or simply dark skin might be associated with negative things, including a
lack of intelligence. As Faith explains further in the excerpt that follows, in her classes,
her American colleagues often treated her as lacking in the same intelligence that they
possessed.
You will experience some kind of, you know, that gap. Especially in some of the
courses we take. And you realize that other students, especially from here, they
may look at you and they see as if you don’t have so much to give. They really
want to feel like they are the only ones who can contribute and their points are
well understood. And yours is just there.” (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014).
She felt that her American classmates perceived her intelligence to be lower, that her
classmates saw her as not having “much to give”, and that they felt that her contributions
to classroom discussion were “just there” while their own contributions were “well
understood.”
179 Similarly, as in the excerpt that follows, Sally pointed out that she was also read
as having “nothing to contribute” in her classes, especially early on before her classmates
got to know her.
Especially to start with, a certain group feels like this individual has nothing to
contribute. There is that attitude, which seems to wear off with time. I realized
because as the discussions continued day after day, kind of people realized some
people may be having more knowledge than us. And then their acceptability
begins. And people want to be in the same discussion group with you or doing a
project with you. (Interview 4 with Sally, 7-17-2015).
Although at the beginning of her courses Sally was assumed to be less intelligent, and to
have nothing to contribute, Sally noted that this perception changed with time after her
classmates came to realize she may actually be knowledgeable as well. At that point,
there was a shift in how she was perceived, and her classmates began to seek her out for
discussion groups and projects.
Like Sally, and as previously shown, Faith was also often stereotyped as lacking
in the same intelligence as her American classmates. Faith also proved these stereotypes
wrong and took comfort in the fact that she did equally as well, or even better than the
white classmates that stereotyped her, when it came to academics. In the excerpt that
follows, Faith explains this:
One thing that really encourages me is to find myself doing better than even some
of them in class. That one really gives me some morale. Just keep moving on!
Some of them they may look at the color of the skin and they think that maybe the
way the skin appears to be a little bit dark, even the mind also is a little bit dark
180 the same. But in the real sense, I feel like we are, as far as thinking is concerned
and academic-wise is concerned, we are equal. We are at par. Maybe even better
than some of them. There is that attitude of feeling like they are good and all.
(Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014)
In this quote, Faith repeats the idea that some of her white classmates perceived her dark
skin to mean that her mind was also dark, or that she was not a bright student. But
regardless of how her classmates perceived her, Faith felt that they were “equal” and “at
par”, and that maybe she was doing even better than them academically. She noted that
the white students had that attitude that they were “good and all.” Faith and Sally both
used their brains to prove their intelligence in environments where they were assumed to
be lacking in intelligence.
Another participant, Nicole, faced racism of a different kind. Her colleagues
expressed ideas that they had about her, about Africa, and about Africans, that were
based on stereotypes about Africa. She gave some examples in the excerpt below:
Like this one now who asked me about the elephant, and this one who also told
me that they met a Nigerian man they wish I was there because we could have
spoken the same language. First I felt like that was ignorance. But because the girl
was very excited that they found me somebody from my country, I thought that
was maybe the much they knew. And then, do you know another one said the first
day I saw you, I looked at your face and said, “Oh my! This girl’s face is even
smoother than mine!” That means they expect that girls from Africa have very
rough faces, which are not cleaned. Because they have been shown that in Africa
181 there is all dirt. As in, you know, they are very genuine. (Interview 4 with Nicole,
9-4-2014)
The examples that Nicole gave above, such as the assumption that Africa is one big
nation where everybody speaks the same language, the assumptions that there are wild
animals roaming everywhere in Africa and people keep them as pets (this was the story
behind the reference to the elephant in this first sentence of the above excerpt), and the
assumption that African girls have rough skin, are all some of the misconceptions that
Nicole experienced some Americans having about her identity as an African. Nicole
attributed some of these assumptions by her colleagues in her classes as stemming from
genuine ignorance of what it meant to be African.
The experiences of participants presented in this section indicate that participants
had racist and deficit assumptions made about them based on stereotypes that are often
based on race, nationality, and linguistic background. There are growing numbers of
African international students in U.S. universities, and language is one of the major issues
that multilingual international students face in U.S. university classrooms (Constantine,
Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; Wamwara-Mbugua &
Cornwell, 2010). Coming into a context where their languages and accents are often
stigmatized, international students, and especially international students from Africa,
often find themselves marginalized and isolated (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel,
Caldwell, & Utsey (2005), with both their students and colleagues making deficit
assumptions about them based on their race and their accents (Gatua, 2014; WamwaraMbugua & Cornwell, 2010). These studies, which show the experiences with linguistic
182 and racial prejudice that other African international students have had in the U.S., are
discussed in more detail in chapter two.
Lippi-Green (2004) argues that language is heavily linked to race and racism in
the U.S. While overt discrimination based on someone’s skin color is frowned upon in
the U.S., discrimination based on one’s language and accent has become a disguise for
things that are really based on race and nationality. As Lippi-Green (2004) points out,
“many have come to believe that some types of English are “more English” than others;
that there is one perfect and appropriate kind of English that everyone should speak; that
failure to speak it is an indication of stupidity, willfulness, or misguided social allegiance
(p. 293). Lippi-Green’s (2004) argument is reflected clearly in the participant experiences
presented in this section. The assumptions made about the participants’ intelligence were
based on their race, nationality, and the accents with which they spoke the English
language. The fact that participants were perceived as having a Kenyan accent added
another layer to the discrimination and marginalization that they experienced as black
international students in U.S. university classrooms, leading to their being ignored and
brushed off, and also being dismissed as having nothing to contribute. Although some
participants, like Faith and Sally, chose not to focus much attention on issues of race,
they did observe and recognize those issues. And they understood the stereotypes and
assumptions made about them to be based on their race, nationality, and their accents.
Linguistic and racial stereotyping was therefore one of the major subthemes, under the
overarching theme of marginalization, in participants’ descriptions of their language and
identity experiences in the United States.
183 Silencing of African Languages and Identities
The third subtheme in the U.S. context interviews that was identified under the
theme of marginalization is the subtheme of the silencing African languages and
identities. Upon arriving in the U.S., language immediately became a major concern for
participants. This was especially the case once they started taking, and in some cases,
teaching classes in the U.S. They had a hard time understanding their professors and their
peers, and their professors and peers had an equally hard time understanding them.
Language difficulties and cultural differences in the classroom became a source of much
discomfort for the participants.
Isaac, for example, struggled with English throughout his schooling in Kenya.
Although after his teacher training, and working as a teacher in Kenya for many years, he
was fluent in English by the time he came to the U.S., he found that his colleagues often
did not understand him because of his accent. He also had a hard time understanding their
accents. In the excerpt below, Isaac outlines the situation he found himself in as an
African international student in a U.S. university classroom:
There were really difficult times in terms of participation. You know you get to be
vetted based on the way people are speaking and the way, you know, how you
speak. So many a times, yes, you would want to contribute, but you lack the
words. You just feel like no, I may not express it as well as I am supposed to. But
I would honestly tell you, in the first few weeks, it was not even more of my
participation. It was more of whether I was getting what they were talking about. I
really wasn’t getting much of what was happening. Sometimes the professor
would just talk. I hear a few words, so you just assumed that word meant
184 something else. I mean, it is a lot of discomfort when you are in class and you are
not getting much of what is being said. When others are nodding, you are simply
like “what did he really say?” nodding in agreement or whatever. You are not
comfortable. And then in some of the discussion classes, especially some of my
education classes were a lot more discussion classes. You would hear your
colleagues trying to say something. But when you cannot say something, you feel
like, one either you did not understand. Like there were times I wasn’t sure
whether what I feel is supposed to be discussed, because I may be just in my own
assumptions based on the few words that I’ve heard. And I think I know what
exactly is required only to be out of point. That is sort of intimidation. So you end
up keeping quiet just listening to others (Interview 4 with Isaac, 7-16-2014)
Isaac’s words in the excerpt above are very telling of how he felt as an African
international student in his U.S. university classrooms. He said “it is a lot of discomfort
when you are in class” and also used the words “intimidation” and “difficult times” to
describe the feelings that he had. He felt silenced in that he could not participate in
classroom discussion because, as he put it, “you get to be vetted based on the way people
are speaking and the way, you know, how you speak.” Isaac recognized that the way he
spoke was already stigmatized, and he felt uncomfortable about exposing himself by
speaking out and risking being judged based on the way he spoke. With English being a
second language for him, he also feared he might not express his ideas as well as he was
expected to, or that he might lack the words to express his ideas. As such, he ended up
“keeping quiet just listening to others.” As other people participated in the learning
process, Isaac was silenced by fear and intimidation.
185 Isaac went on to say that it wasn’t just his fears about participating that made his
time in classes uncomfortable. He had an equally hard time understanding his professors
and his peers. Often he found that he only heard a few words of what they had said and
had to fill in the rest of what he thought they said with his assumptions. Isaac was
silenced and intimidated in the American university classroom. He did not understand
what was going on, and was fearful that what he assumed was going on might in fact not
be what was actually going on. That prevented him from speaking up in class. Asked
whether he felt his professors supported him in trying to make him feel more comfortable
in their classrooms, Isaac responded in the following way:
First of all, I wasn’t sure they knew I had a problem, unless you tell them. So one
thing is that my way of doing things is, rarely talk to them about my issues. Just
try to see how best I can handle them in my own way. So the truth is I never told
them. So many a times they assumed everybody is getting it. And there were quite
a number of occasions they would ask if anybody has any question or anything.
But many times I wouldn’t speak up. It’s my normal way. I rarely raised up my
hand to say that I didn’t hear what you said or I didn’t get this and this. I don’t. So
I cannot blame them. I would just try to say let me figure this out on my own.
(Interview 4 with Isaac, 7-16-2014)
In the excerpt above, Isaac takes on the blame for his own discomfort in the U.S.
classroom. He excuses his professors’ lack of recognition of his struggles as his own fault
since he did not raise his hand and say that he was having a hard time understanding the
professors and his colleagues. The professor would ask if anyone had any questions, and
Isaac would not volunteer his confusion by asking any questions. Isaac however, does not
186 indicate that his professors ever made any efforts, beyond asking generally if anyone had
any questions, to make him feel included in the classroom discussions. When he
remained silent, nobody checked in individually with him to try and understand why he
was silent, or how they could help him feel more comfortable about being a part of that
classroom community.
Isaac indicated elsewhere in our interviews that he was more comfortable in his
mathematics classes because the mathematics classes were highly diverse in comparison
to courses in education that he had to take. Isaac’ classes in education were
predominantly white American, with a majority of his colleagues being white American
females. Additionally, his classes in Mathematics did not involve a lot of discussion,
unlike his classes in education that were mostly discussion based.
Isaac ultimately failed his qualifying exams a couple of times before being pushed
out of that U.S. university. He was then forced to look for a job and move to a different
city. He joined another PhD program as a part time student, and at the time of this study,
was having to retake classes all over again because the school had a limit on the number
of credits that one could transfer from another institution.
Another participant, Kariuki, shared his frustration with the dynamics of the
American classroom whereby American students dominate discussions while
international students are silenced, mainly because of issues to do with language. He
expressed these experiences in the excerpt below:
If you attend a classroom where we have Americans, and I think this is
upbringing, they have, like in grad school, the grad classes I have attended most
of them are kind of very proactive. English is their first language, so when a
187 question is posed by the lecturer, they kind of get it very fast. They are proactive,
like they would want to answer very fast. So it is common in the classes that I
have attended to find that international students, not that they don’t know or they
don’t understand, it’s just that some of our American colleagues are quite fast,
which is not a bad thing. It is because of the upbringing. This is their country.
You are used to freedom of expression. But international students, there is that
wait time, which the professors in my view need to take into account. That when
you have an international class, Americans would answer very fast. Because these
others are trying to first of all formulate. English is not their first language. So we
are trying to construct a sentence. Like for me, I struggle with these people to
understand (Interview 4 with Kariuki, 9-24-2014).
Kariuki found that American students had the linguistic upper hand, in addition to
coming from a culture that rewards proactive behavior, and they could answer questions
very fast in discussions. He contrasted this to the position of international student needing
more time to construct a response in English in their minds before articulating it to the
class. Because it was difficult to keep up with the fast and proactive pace of American
students in class participation, Kariuki struggled. However, Kariuki did not think that this
was intentionally meant to silence international students, as he pointed out below:
They are quick in answering not because it is intentional to shut out. It is just that,
for me I think it is the barrier, the communication barrier. English is not our first
language, so whenever there is a question, there is always what I would call a wait
time. Okay, there is a wait time for the Americans students to understand the
questions. But for international students it is double wait time. Double wait time
188 first to understand the question and the construction of the answer, formulation of
the answer in a language other than your own.” (Interview 4 with Kariuki, 9-242014)
Kariuki pointed out the difference in how American students and international student, to
whom English is not a first language, communicate in the classroom. While American
students needed some wait time from their professors in answering questions, Kariuki felt
that international students needed double that wait time, because in addition to processing
the question, they needed time to formulate an answer in a second language. Kariuki
offered some suggestions for how professors can work with international students in
order to avoid silencing them in their classrooms.
We have different dialects. I would just say like people should be conscious that
those of us who are international students, English is not our first language and
the English that is our first language again is not the American English. It is
English from maybe London. But even that accent. So it is not even English from
London. This is English made in Kenya. There should be an aspect of patience.
And people should not be, when I say, “pardon me” or “say that again,” like every
time you get tired of me. When I tell you, “say that again,” it does not mean that I
am stupid or I don’t understand or I am slow, or I am an African from a dark
continent who are slow in understanding. No,no,no. It just means that I am telling
you to slow down, let us come at the same level and we can communicate. When
it comes to classroom instructional practices, maybe instructors should be
conscious of that and give international students who English is not their first
language time. What I would call wait time. And know that Americans would be
189 fast in answering, not because they think fast. It’s because even English is their
first language. But for us we would struggle with understanding, and then struggle
in constructing our sentences.” (Interview 4 with Kariuki, 9-24-2014)
Kariuki felt that it would be beneficial for international students if professors took
into account their language issues during class discussions so that these students can also
have opportunities to contribute to the learning process. Rather than getting frustrated
with international students and viewing them as being “stupid” or “slow”, efforts should
be made to understand that English is a second language for them and when information
is presented in English, it might take longer for them to process it than would a native
speaker of the language.
Of all ten participants in this study, Faith had perhaps the most vernacular
influence in her spoken English. Her first language was Kikuyu, and her spoken English
had a lot of Kikuyu influence in the way that she pronounced her words. In the classes
that she took in her first semester as a student in a U.S. university, she did not speak up
much because some people could not understand what she was saying. In the excerpt that
follows, Faith talks about her experiences in U.S. university classrooms.
Let me say for the first semester, it was a time to adjust. It was not easy for me.
So many things to do with culture. I think I really experienced what is called
culture shock. And the first thing was to do with language. I found out that with
my English accent, some people could not really understand me. So it was not
easy for me. And most of the time, even in classes, I was like I just want to, not to
talk too much, just try to listen. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014)
190 Like with Isaac’s experiences, Faith felt silenced due to her accent. Her
colleagues in her classes did not seem to understand her, and that was hard on her. Her
response to the language difficulties that she experienced in her classes was to avoid
talking, and instead “just try to listen.” This experience of having such a hard time
because of language difficulties was a real shock to Faith, as she explains in the excerpt
that follows:
I think for me it was not very easy to start with. I thought that with the English
that I knew, everybody would understand me. And I think even it got worse.
Especially when I started my classes, whereby we could now interact with many
whites. Sometimes I could talk something and they are like, “huh?” I need to
repeat again. And me I was like, “how come they are not understanding what I’m
saying? I need to stop talking now that these people do not seem to really
understand my accent.” I felt like I’m shying now away. I mean it was not a good
feeling because, gosh, at first it was very stressful for me. I was wondering, will I
get to a point whereby I will feel at ease with the way I communicate and even be
able to speak in a way that the other person will be able to understand me quickly
without really struggling? I thought that with the English that I have, I would be
able to speak and people understand me. So to me it was a real shock. It was a real
shock to me and I was like I don’t even feel comfortable now speaking to some
students, especially those who speak like they have a very real American accent,
very fast. Sometimes there are some words that I don’t really hear. And I try to
connect as per the context. Just connecting. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014)
191 Constantly being asked to repeat herself silenced Faith because coming into the country,
she had thought that the English she already knew was enough for people to be able to
understand her. She did not understand everything Americans said, but she made some
effort to connect the dots based on the context and she tried to make meaning of what
was being said. But when it became apparent that people did not understand her, or were
not making enough effort to try to understand her, she thought it might be better for her to
stop talking.
Faith worked hard to try and cope with the issues surrounding language that she
faced in the American university classroom. Some professors tried to make the classes
more accessible and more comfortable for her and other international students, as she
notes in the excerpt below:
So during that time I remember there are times where I could like share my
contribution and I realize the other students, especially those who are Americans,
they are really not understanding some of the words that I’m using, or my accent.
So I had to keep on repeating. But I am also happy that even the instructor that
was teaching at that time, I think she so much used to listen to many accents. She
could come in and help to explain more what I meant. (Interview 4 with Faith, 628-2014)
Although Faith had language difficulties in her classes, she did take at least one class
where the instructor of the course was able to understand her accent and would come to
her aid and explain what she had said when her classmates did not understand her.
Faith experienced a change in her comfort levels in her classes after her first
semester. In her second semester, Faith took a class that turned out to be more diverse
192 than her previous classes, as well as having fewer students. She credited that course for
helping her learn how to deal with the problems she was experiencing with language at
that point.
So when I started my spring semester the second semester, there is one course that
I took- secondary education. I must say that that course really exposed me very
well, especially to more of the language because we were not many students. We
were about 6 students in the course, and 3 were African American, and two were
whites. And I was the only international student from Kenya. So for me it was a
good experience. At first it was challenging because I was wondering, would I
really be getting what these people are saying? Their accent and all that? But that
was like a training ground for me. I just felt that it is my moment now to learn to
listen keenly and get to understand what the other students, their accent is like.
And that class, besides learning and sailing very well in the course, I think I really
learnt a lot when it comes to listening. And I also learned how to talk. I felt at ease
in that class finally. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014)
Faith noted that this particular class had six students total, with three being
African American, herself being African, and two being white. Faith finally “felt at ease”
in that class and she also “learned how to talk,” something she had struggled with in
classes she had taken previously. Additionally, afterwards, Faith became more
comfortable with asking people to repeat themselves, rather than staying silent and trying
to guess what people meant as she would often do earlier on. She explains this in the
quote that follows:
193 I started training myself just like, to be a good listener. Just to learn to listen to
others. And if I don’t hear very keenly, at first I was not able to ask people to
repeat what they had said. But I think with time I am able to ask people politely,
“just repeat what you have said” for me to be able to understand them. (Interview
4 with Faith, 6-28-2014)
As is evident in the excerpt above, Faith was able to move past the silence that was
imposed on her by her classroom environments, and the silence that she had imposed on
herself because of frustration at not being understood. She moved past the silence to a
place where she was able to listen more keenly to hear other people when they spoke, and
also to speak up when she did not understand someone. This is not to say that Faith felt
completely free of the imposed and self-imposed silence that she experienced as a new
international student in a U.S. university. In the excerpt that follows, Faith expressed
hope for a time when she will be able to feel comfortable about speaking in various
contexts without any fears with regards to her language and accent.
As for myself, I would like to see having really improved in my communication
with just feeling at ease when I am with anyone. Like I don’t feel here I should
talk, there I cannot talk too much because I’m fearing whether they are going to
understand what I’m saying. I’m looking forward to a point whereby I’m able to
express myself at ease with others and they really understand what I am saying.
And they too can talk and I am able to understand what they are saying, which I
can really see forth coming. Because at least I have really improved in my
listening skills. (Interview 5 with Faith, 6-30-2014)
194 In this quote, Faith communicated that although she had improved her listening skills to
be able to understand what other people in her classes were saying, she still did not feel
completely at ease about speaking. She still looked forward to a time when she would be
able to speak in front of anyone without being fearful that she might not be understood.
There were still contexts where she felt like she could not or should not talk, as expressed
in this sentence, “like I don’t feel here I should talk, there I cannot talk too much.” There
was still work to be done to reach a space where Faith felt like she was really free to talk
and express herself.
Unlike Faith’s accent, which is rather heavily influenced by her African language,
Kikuyu, Valerie had little to no vernacular influence in her accent. That means that it was
not easily perceptible what linguistic community she came from simply by her accent.
While there was still a bit of a Kenyan accent in her English, it was obvious from
listening to her that she had been in the United States for a while. Her accent had some of
the characteristics of an American accent. However, Valerie remembered feeling out of
place in her classes when she first arrived. Despite her previously extroverted personality,
she found herself becoming introverted and avoiding conversations with her classmates
once she got to the U.S. In the excerpt that follows, Valerie explained this:
I guess I was feeling left out. My American faculty might have felt like I didn’t
know anything. When folks do not pay attention to what you are saying, or before
class people want to come early and chat. When I was in undergrad and high
school, I was always the “who is who,” the ones picking out the ones left out. But
now the tables turned when I came to this culture. With different ways of doing
things, I was now the one very reserved, not talking much. Because I didn’t want
195 to say anything. I would walk in a few minutes before class started, and I would
sit in one corner so that I don’t have to say anything. I became very introverted. I
thought I was an extrovert but I realized that I am an introvert, with extrovert
tendencies when I was Kenya. (Interview 4 with Valerie, 7-28-2014)
Valerie felt that her American instructors thought she “didn’t know anything” because
she did not feel comfortable in her new environment. For example, she says that before
class, her classmates would come into the classroom early and chat. But she would walk
in a few minutes before class started and sit in a corner so that she didn’t have to say
anything to anyone. While she had been an extrovert in Kenya, and she describes herself
as having been the “who is who” in high school and undergraduate, when she came to the
U.S. as a graduate student, the tables turned, and suddenly she was the introverted student
sneaking into class right before it started to avoid talking to people. Indeed, looking back
at excerpts from Valerie’s interviews in previous sections of this chapter, she felt that
once she came to the U.S., suddenly she was a raced individual, and she had to constantly
explain who she was and where she was from when people heard her accent. This
silenced her, and as previously noted in her earlier experiences, she now had to take on a
history and an identity that she had previously not had to deal with.
In their US graduate programs, participants felt pressured to speak a certain way.
Most participants felt that they were communicating clearly enough, but their accents
were often a cause of discomfort and unease among their colleagues in the classroom,
and their students in the classes they taught as teaching assistants. The discomfort and
silencing was not always because of the language that they spoke, but rather because of
how they were perceived based on their race and their accents. In discussing the politics
196 of language and the perception of language minority students in the U.S., Nieto (2002)
states, “linguistically, there is nothing wrong with the languages they speak; for purposes
of communication, one language is as valid as any other. But socially and politically, the
languages spoken by most language minority students in the United States are accorded
low status” (p. 82). This view expressed by Nieto (2002) was reflected in the experiences
of participants in this study. Reactions to their varieties of the English language when
they spoke reflected the low status that was accorded to their accents. As such, the
participants were fearful about speaking in class, lest they attract the stigma and disdain
of their classmates.
Responses to Marginalization
In the preceding section, I have presented findings of the forms of linguistic and
identity marginalization, including stereotyping and silencing, that participants
experienced in their US classrooms, both in their role as students and as teaching
assistants. While the marginalization was obviously distressing to the participants, some
participants took whatever opportunities they could to push back against the
marginalization of their languages and identities. As defined earlier in this chapter,
marginalization, as a theme here, refers to the ways in which participants’ identities as
speakers of African languages were suppressed and/or devalued while dominant
linguistic and cultural identities were promoted as superior. In this section, I will present
findings that show the different ways that participants responded to the marginalization of
their African languages and identities in the United States.
Participants’ responses to the marginalization of their languages and identities
took various forms. While some participants, like Valerie, actively tried to resist
197 marginalization, other participants like Eva and Daniel tried to resist the marginalization
by finding community with other Kenyans in the U.S., or with African Americans. Eva
was successful in creating a community with other African American women, where they
supported each other as black women, while another participant, Nicole, took issue with
the way African Americans responded to racism and marginalization in the U.S. The
experiences of these participants are presented in this section.
As a student, Eva, sometimes encountered instances of racism, or ignorance in her
classes. When she was newer to the U.S., she would get angry when faced with racism,
but after being in the U.S. for a while, her response changed, as evidenced in the excerpt
that follows:
Even in class, I had a professor who said that Africa is a dark continent, while I
am an African. And we have done research about Africa and documented about
Africa. Even still they would still mention things about Africa in my earshot,
things that I have already told them that they are myths, but they would still off
track Africa. And before I would get angry. But now I don’t get angry anymore.
Because I understand that some people will always be like that, and there are
things that wouldn’t just change. (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
In this excerpt, Eva notes that some of the things that her colleagues in the classroom said
about Africa, she had already told them that they were myths, and yet they kept saying
then. Therefore, she did not feel compelled to respond to the stereotypes anymore, since
they were things she had already made attempts to clarify in the past. Eva had learned to
move past anger, to an acceptance that “some people will always be like that, and there
are things that wouldn’t just change.”
198 In some instances however, there was some push back when someone made
insensitive comments about Africa, as Eva recalled in the excerpt below:
In one of the forums I attended, this gentleman stood up and told us the reason we
would not develop is because our ways were quite primitive. And that did not sink
in well with a lot of people. And most were not happy with him. Because
“primitive” is not a word you use with Africans. (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-182014)
The incident that Eva described above took place at one of the forums that she attended
with other black women, mostly African American. A man stood up and used the word
“primitive” in reference to African ways, and this was problematic for the attendees at the
forum because as Eva pointed out “ primitive is not a word you use with Africans”
because of the history that Africans have had with that word. Words like primitive, and
backward, are some of the words historically used to describe Africans by white
colonizers.
Eva had to find a way to cope with the marginalizing issues that she faced in the
U.S. Eva found community with African Americans because she felt that African
Americans experienced the same struggles with race and identity that she experienced as
an African woman, and they were willing to interrogate those issues. Eva explained that
in the following quote:
I wanted to know of African Americans and how they were encountering the
same problems like immigrants. Because as immigrants, we didn’t have a
language to discuss what we were going through. I made comparisons of the
predicament of the African Americans and that of Africans and I saw that it was
199 relatively the same. I saw that we had the same problems when it came to identity
issues. (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
Eva made parallels between her experiences as a black immigrant and the experiences of
African Americans and decided that they experienced some of the same issues as black
people in the United States.
While Eva was able to find herself and her identity by interacting with and having
conversations with African Americans, Nicole took a different approach. Nicole felt that
it was more helpful for Americans, both black and white, to work towards moving on
from racism instead of shining a spotlight on it. She also thought that the issues of race in
the United States are exaggerated. Ogbu (1992) discusses the differences in how
voluntary and involuntary minorities view the U.S. by distinguishing between how the
two groups became incorporated into the American society. He defines voluntary
minorities as people who moved voluntarily to the U.S. “because they believe that this
would result in more economic well-being, better overall opportunities, and/or greater
political freedom. Even though they experience subordination here, the positive
expectations they bring with them influence their perception of the U.S. society and
schools controlled by Whites” (p. 290-291). Involuntary minorities on the other hand
became part of the U.S. by involuntary means, such as slavery, and as such are less likely
to have positive views of the U.S. (Gibson & Ogbu, 1991: Ogbu, 1992). Given the
voluntary nature of all participants’ moves to the U.S., most participants did not think
racism in the U.S. was something they needed to focus on, and some, like Nicole, thought
involuntary minorities, like African Americans, were making it into a bigger issue than it
needed to be. The excerpt that follows is a quote from an interview with Nicole:
200 I also feel that we should not blow the whole idea out of proportion. Like we
should not start looking for racism where it is not. Sometimes I feel like they are
taking very petty things to make them look like they are racist, or they are based
on race. Well the majority of what people feel is racism is actually there. But then
I also feel like the slavery and the slave trade and being slaves happened almost
300 years back. So what they could do is to teach generations to try and co-exist
with each other because they are in America. They are going nowhere. They have
to live here. But then we cannot continue feeding on the children what happened
all those years back. It is good to keep the history, but because the history has
some negatives impacts towards these children, it is good for the parents, both for
the white and black, to try and show them that they can live together, and that that
was history. (Interview 4 with Nicole, 9-4-2014)
As explained in previous sections, Nicole did experience instances of marginalization, for
example when she described people brushing her off once they heard her accent, or when
colleagues made stereotypical assumptions about her as an African woman. But Nicole,
as illustrated in the excerpt above, still took issue with some of the ways that African
Americans responded to issues of racism in America. I wanted to explore this further
with Nicole, and so with further conversation, Nicole revealed that she felt African
Americans had a negative attitude towards Africans, and that she also felt excluded from
the experiences of African Americans. While she recognized that racism was real in the
United States, she felt that sometimes it was exaggerated. She did not feel included in the
issues that African Americans faced in the United States, and as a response to this
perceived marginalization, she felt disconnected from them.
201 I have realized that the African Americans too also have another attitude towards
the Africans themselves. Such that now maybe they feel like it is the Africans
who sold them to be slaves. And now they have another negative attitudes
towards the whites because they made them slaves. We can all forget about this
thing because even my great grandparents were not participants of slave trade.
Yet it is still affecting hundreds of generations that came later. So I think it is a
big issue that cannot be swept under the carpet. At the same time we should not
blow it out of proportion. Sometimes when you go to the shopping malls, you
realized that even the way the African Americans answer you back when you ask
for something, is not like a friendly way you would expect them to. Sometimes
white attendants can respond to you in a more respectful way than African
Americans. Or when you are asking for direction if you need to get somewhere
and they seem to have no time even for one second to explain to you what you are
really asking for. I feel like that’s kind of an attitude. And even in class, they
would want to talk like they are in a class of their own that has not been
experienced by anyone else. “You Africans what are you talking about and you
just found us here?” Yeah, that kind of attitude. Of course you expect that when
you see them because you have the same color of skin, and you all maybe trace
roots in Africa, you should be more closer than the whites. But then you realized
that they are even further or they pull themselves further in their own cocoon or
class. If you are like forming groups, they want to form their own group that is
only made of African Americans, and you find your way to other groups.
(Interview 4 with Nicole, 9-4-2014)
202 Nicole expected that because they shared the same skin color, African Americans would
be more accepting and inclusive of her as an African. However, she found that that was
not the case. The African Americans in her classes excluded her on the basis that she was
a newcomer to the experience of being black in America, and as such she was not
expected to know about that experience. Nicole therefore responded to this
marginalization by people she expected to be on the same side with her by distancing
herself from them, and becoming further alienated from the possibly of interrogating
issues of race and racism with them in some of the ways that participants like Eva did.
Unlike Nicole, Eva had conversations with her group of African American sisters
that she felt were including, rather than excluding, of her as an African woman. To
distinguish between the experiences of Eva and Nicole, though, Eva had been in the U.S.
over ten years by the time of our interviews, while Nicole had been in the U.S. only one
year. Additionally, Eva viewed the U.S. as potentially her permanent home, since she did
not have plans to move back to Kenya, while Nicole was still keeping her options open.
In the group of African and African American women that Eva became a part of, they
interrogated issues of how Africans and African Americans view each other and the
reasons behind the negative views that each group might have of the other.
Some of the conversations we had were such as how we see each other and how
we know each other and it was evident that most of what we knew about each
other was from what the media showed us. Most African Americans when they
see us, they believe that we are snobbish. And from Kenya where I come from,
we see them as the 49th tribe. And we come with a stereotype that they are lazy
people and the media has already depicted them so negatively. And therefore we
203 put them at the bottom of where we come from. We were very conflicted because
most African Americans remind us about where we wanted to be and where we
didn’t want to be. And even at home most of us grew up in the pop culture and we
admired the pop musicians and actors of the U.S. But when we come here, we
struggle and we are caught in between the relation between the Americans and the
African Americans. And we come from a setting where white people, like back in
Kenya, are held at a higher stature and are seen as the best in certain expertise.
And most of us did not grow up during colonialism, so there is a way we don’t
view American people as how the African American people see them. And when
we see that, we think it’s wrong because we don’t know the history between them.
And most of our parents don’t talk about it, so we don’t know what happened.
(Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
Eva cited issues of survival and protecting one’s immigration status as some of the
reasons Africans might not be in a position to offer solidarity to African Americans in the
struggle against racism. As Gibson & Ogbu (1991) point out, voluntary minorities come
to the U.S. with positive expectations, and they see the U.S. as having better prospects for
them and their families, in comparison to their home countries, and as such, they are
more likely to do everything they can to survive, and even thrive, in the U.S. Eva
observed that for Africans in the U.S., getting involved in resisting racism might be
viewed as potentially jeopardizing their immigration status, and as such, their ability to
pursue a better life in America.
And besides, we have issues of surviving here. When you come to school here
and you start aligning yourself with African Americans, you might have
204 problems, as they are resisting. And you are African, and they ultimately view
themselves as Americans. In many situations, we know what is going on and we
know what racism is, but we cannot protest because we don’t have the voice. Plus
some of us have very sensitive papers and we might be deported back to Kenya at
any time. So we cannot resist very strongly. And some of us are economic
refugees in our countries. For instance myself, I might not do better because I lack
the connections. And for now, I can do better here in America than in Kenya.
Therefore it requires a certain discipline to interact, because I might see
someone’s’ unfairness but because I am not a citizen, I cannot protest because I
have no fall back plan. But comparing to the African American, I can trace back
to my roots and say this is my family, this is where I came from. African
Americans don’t have that advantage, and that is a factor that makes them angry.
We also had conversations on how we call them. Some of the Africans called
them animals. I wondered why you would call people who look like you wild
animals? (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
While Eva was able to have these important conversations with African Americans and
explore her own identity in the process, she found that she was not able to have the same
conversations with her Kenyan community in the U.S. The Kenyans in her community in
the U.S. preferred to not confront the issue of race but rather believe that anyone can be
successful as long as they worked hard. Additionally, being only temporarily in the U.S.,
they did not feel like they needed to invest themselves in the country and the country’s
issues, as Eva explains below:
205 Eva: I’d say that most of them are very Christian and there are issues like racism
that I wouldn’t be up to talk to them about because I don’t think they could hold
such conversations.
Nyaboke: And why is that?
Eva: They are not ready. And yet they are actually raising their kids here. And
they are the kind of people that use the Bible to say that success is based on your
hard work. So that’s why I don’t have such conversations with them. We are not
as united as we used to be. Like last week, we got an email that we should collect
at least 20 dollars in case of a funeral. But it didn’t go down well because most of
the students know that they will later relocate or some would want to return home.
So they would not invest because the place is like “a by the way” place.
(Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
Eva perceived that the Africans in her community here in the U.S. were not ready for
conversations about race because of the Africans’ lack of investment in the country, and
also because the Africans had Christian convictions that Eva felt made it difficult to have
certain conversations with them. And so Eva’s personal response to the marginalization
of her identities in the U.S. was to align herself with African American, whom she felt
were more invested in some of the same issues of racism that she wanted to interrogate.
Another participant, Valerie, felt uncomfortable when she first arrived in the U.S.
as a graduate student. But her experiences motivated her to pursue work on the issues that
international students face when they come to study in the U.S. In addition to pursuing a
PhD in education, Valerie also held a position working with international students at her
206 university. In the excerpt that follows, she outlines the ways that, through her position,
she advocated for international students coming into U.S. universities:
I think a lot of what has contributed to my being successful as an international
staff member in this school is that I now have a voice. I now know how to
navigate the nuances of political issues within higher ed. I am no longer the quiet
graduate student. I am an advocate for myself and for my students. So many
people call me when they want to consult about something. So I think that is what
you can say is the differences between how I felt as a graduate student and my
first job. To the point now I am considered an expert…. So our students do have a
voice. We advocate for them when they are facing discrimination on campus. So
they know. We tell them that from the very beginning; don’t suffer in silence. Let
somebody know if anyone is impeding on your freedom. (Interview 4 with
Valerie, 7-28-2014)
Valerie pointed out that she now had a voice. She said this in reference to the fact that
when she was new to the U.S., she was instantly silenced by her new environment, and
she suddenly became introverted although she had been more extroverted before. But
with time, she gained a voice and was “no longer the quiet graduate student.” Valerie saw
herself as an advocate for herself and her students. She drew on her own experiences as
an international student with a multilingual background to advocate for the needs of
international students that were facing the same kinds of issues that she had faced when
she first arrived in the U.S.
In describing some of the issues that the international students that she worked
with faced, Valerie pointed out that:
207 For other students, it is normally cyber bullying, or someone leaving you a note
saying, go home. Or the worst is when it is the faculty member that is bullying the
student. You will find a faculty member who told a Nigerian student, “Hey you
will never amount to anything apart from being an athlete or being a musician.”
So this was a tenured professor, but still within that tenure, you are held
accountable. So we use the legal office to get him taken care of. (Interview 4 with
Valerie, 7-28-2014)
The discrimination issues that students faced came from not just other students but from
faculty members sometimes. Stereotypes and prejudices played a role in how
international students were viewed by their peers and by the instructors, and sometimes
those prejudices came out in the form of attacks on individual international students. Noel
(2000) points out that it is important for educators to interrogate their own prejudices,
even when they don’t think that they have any. In the U.S., it is common for educators to
deny having any prejudices against any groups of students (Noel, 2000), but cases of
prejudice, racism and discrimination against students that are outside of the dominant
race and culture are also widespread. Valerie’s office at her university in the U.S. ensured
that those people that subjected international students to discriminatory treatment were
held accountable, regardless of their positions.
The participants in this study responded to the marginalization of their languages
and identities in the Unites States in different ways. Valerie, for example, initially
silenced by the marginalizing experiences that she had, later on found her voice and faced
the issues of marginalization head-on through her position as support staff for
international students coming into her university. While Nicole rejected the magnitude of
208 the issue of racism in America and distanced herself from African Americans, Eva
formed a close sisterhood with a group of African American women, and through this
group, interrogated the common issues surrounding racism and marginalization that they
faced as black women in the United States. The experiences of the participants in this
study as relates to their responses to marginalization therefore varied in some ways, but
they also all revealed a struggle to reconcile their identities to an environment where
those identities were not valued.
Conclusion
This chapter focused on the theme of marginalization of African languages and
identities in the Kenyan and U.S. contexts. This theme was common to the experiences of
all ten participants. In the Kenyan context, the theme of marginalization was presented
under four subthemes: punishing students’ use of African languages, silencing African
languages and identities, hierarchy of languages and identities, and resisting the
marginalization of African languages and identities. Under these subthemes, findings
from the participants’ experiences were presented from the domains named in the
research question: What are the post-colonial language and identity experiences of
transnational Kenyan teachers in graduate education programs in the United States in the
following domains: a) their primary and secondary schooling in Kenya b) their teacher
preparation in Kenya c) their teaching experiences in Kenya; and d) their graduate
education in the United States? However, although experiences from the domains in the
research question were included, more focus was put into the themes and subthemes that
emerged than on the timeline of what happened when. This is discussed in more detail in
the methodology section of this dissertation.
209 In the Kenyan context, the participants, or their peers, were humiliated, shamed,
beaten, and forced to perform manual labor in their schools for speaking African
languages in school. The clear message to the students was that their languages were not
valued in school, and that in order to be successful, they had to learn English as quickly
as possible and forget all about their African languages. Teachers were largely
responsible for these humiliations and punishments that participants suffered as students,
and when the participants became teachers themselves, some of them reported using
some of the same methods in an attempt to get students to stop speaking African
languages in school. In doing this, the teachers had good intentions, as they wanted their
students to learn the English language, which is critical for their educational success in
Kenyan schools. However, in thinking back to these experiences, participants felt things
need to change in the methods used to encourage students to learn and speak the English
language. Nieto (2002) notes that teaching is a “lifelong journey of personal
transformation” (p. 280), and learning to understand and value students’ multilingualism
and multiculturalism is part of that journey. It is possible to learn English and all the
academic literacies that are required in school without stumping out students’ native
languages and identities in the process (Delpit, 2002).
The subthemes that emerged under the theme of marginalization in the U.S.
context were: becoming raced, linguistic and racial stereotyping in the U.S., silencing of
African languages and Identities, and responses to marginalization. Teacher participants
experienced marginalization in the U.S. context, both as students and as teaching
Assistants. They reported often feeling like they could not speak in their classes in the
U.S. because for one thing, they often did not understand some of the things that the
210 professors and their peers were talking about. Also, when they attempted to give their
contributions, not being understood, or constantly being asked to repeat themselves made
them shy away from making any further attempts to contribute to classroom discussions.
Furthermore, some participants felt like they were not provided with sufficient
opportunities to participate, as American students were more likely to jump in and answer
questions very fast before they had an opportunity to process the question and formulate a
response. This was perceived to be a cultural thing, as Americans seem to have a culture
of being more proactive in comparison to some other cultures that might frown upon that
kind of behavior. It is important for American university educators to strive to know and
understand the learners in their classroom, especially international learners who come
from different cultures with different languages, in order to be able to create a classroom
environment that is both welcoming and inclusive for all (Ma, 2014; Zheng, 2014).
The theme of the marginalization of African languages and identities that
emerged in interviews with participants in this study is important because a lot of the
same marginalizing and silencing practices that these participants experienced as students
in Kenya, as teachers in Kenya, and as international students in the U.S., continue to
occur in both contexts. Though in different ways, African languages and identities are
marginalized in Kenya just as much as they are marginalized in the U.S. Rather than
finding spaces for both African languages and English to live side by side, attempts are
made to choke African languages out in order to make room for the English language and
westernized identities. This is why it is important to hear the voices of these participants
as they describe their experiences with language and identity in both the Kenyan and the
United States contexts.
211 CHAPTER FIVE
“IT’S LIKE I AM TAKING SOME REST FROM A LOT OF ENGLISH”:
(RE)CLAIMING AFRICAN LANGUAGES AND IDENTITIES IN KENYA AND THE
UNITED STATES
This chapter will present findings on the theme of (re)claiming African languages
and identities, which emerged from the data in this study. I put parenthesis in the word
(re)claiming to indicate that while some participants claimed their African languages and
identities all through their schooling years, and later in life, other participants did not
place a lot of value in, or even tried to distance themselves from their African languages
and identities at some point in their lives, but later on reclaimed them. In discussing the
ways that participants (re)claimed their African languages and identities, I will draw from
post-colonial theories. I will explore the ways the participants experienced their
multilingualism with a specific focus on the ways that they connected and reconnected
with their various languages and identities. Hybridity as a concept in post-colonial
theories will be discussed in this chapter, given that the participants were all multilingual
and had to navigate their identities in the midst of languages, which (as established in
chapter four) often clashed with each other. The participants’ identities as teachers and
scholars in both Kenya and the United States were highly shaped by their ability to speak
the English language, but at the same time, in both contexts, they brought in their
backgrounds as speakers of African languages in ways that informed both their
professional and social lives. They were therefore a mix of different identities, all
informing each other and working together to shape the ways that they interacted with
their students, their colleagues, and other people in their communities.
212 In (re)claiming their African languages and identities, participants engaged in
code-switching depending on the context they were in, or forged hybrid identities where
they enacted their two or more linguistic and cultural identities in various personal and
professional spaces. The term hybridity in post-colonial studies is widely attributed to
Homi Bhabha (2000), and broadly refers to the coming together and co-existence of
multiple languages and cultures in a single individual (Moore-Gilbert, 1997). Many postcolonial nations in Africa adopted the language of their former colonizers and as such,
the people in these countries live with two or more, sometimes opposing, languages and
cultures; a situation that may lead to the habitants of these nations claiming hybrid
identities that encompass both the former colonizer’s language and identities, as well as
their own native languages and identities. Anzaldùa (1987) has also theorized on
hybridity as a borderland identity, an in-between self that is neither one nor the other, but
rather a coming together of multiple identities. Being certified teachers in Kenya and
graduate students in U.S. universities, all participants in this study were highly literate in
English (although their varieties of English were not always valued) and were proud of
their academic accomplishments that got them to this point in their careers. They also
expressed pride in their African linguistic and cultural backgrounds, and asserted that
they viewed their multilingualism as an asset in both their personal and professional
identities. For example, and as will be discussed later on in the chapter, some participants
used their knowledge of African languages and cultures to inform their teaching, thus
creating spaces where both identities worked together to inform their teaching practices.
This chapter is divided into two sections. Both sections are concerned with the
same overarching theme of (re)claiming African languages and identities. The first
213 section focuses on the participants’ Kenyan context experiences, and presents two
subthemes: Nuances of language and identity affiliations, and honoring students’ home
languages. The second section of this chapter focuses on the same overarching theme, but
with a specific focus on participants’ experiences within the United States context. In the
United States context, the following subthemes are discussed: Nuances of language and
identity affiliation, and African languages and identities as capital.
In presenting findings under the theme of (re)claiming African languages and
identities, I consider the participants’ experiences as both students and teachers in Kenya,
as well as their experiences with transnationalism as international students pursuing
graduate education in U.S. universities while maintaining personal and professional ties
to Kenya. The terms globalization and transnationalism, which I will define shortly, were
central to the experiences of the participants, especially in the United States context.
As a result of globalization, defined simply as the increasingly common
interactions across borders that have led to the opening up of borders, global languages,
and cultures (Jordâo, 2009) have emerged as a reality for more people as they adopt
aspects of various cultures and identities in their definitions of themselves. Jordâo (2009)
refers to a global language as “a language without a homeland, or with as many
homelands as there are users of it… a language that belongs to no one and at the same
time to everyone.” (p. 95). For participants in this study, a consequence of globalization
was that they had to put a lot of emphasis on English as a global language, both as
learners in their earlier years, and as teachers later in life.
Another consequence of globalization that was relevant to the participants’
experiences is transnationalism. Jiménez, Smith & Teague (2009) define transnationalism
214 as “the movement of people, media, language, and goods between distinct nation states,
particularly that which flows in both directions and is sustained over time” (p. 16). As
explained in chapter one, I use the term transnationalism to refer to the personal and
professional ties that the participants maintained with their country of origin, Kenya,
while they lived and studied in the U.S. Despite globalization, and the emergence of
English as a global language (Jordâo, 2009), participants (re)claimed their African
languages and identities, and sought to create identities that embraced both English and
their African languages as necessary and important parts of themselves.
Kenyan Context
In this section I will present findings from the two subthemes that were identified
under the theme of (re)claiming African language and identities within the Kenyan
context. First I will present the subtheme of nuances of language and identity affiliations.
Under this subtheme, I will present data that reflects the nuances of participants’
experiences with languages and identity, and the ways that they chose to enact their
multilingualism. For example, some participants chose to claim and reclaim their African
languages, and privilege those languages in their lives. Some participants chose to claim
and reclaim their African languages, but privilege English and dominant identities. Yet
other participants chose to take the middle ground, privileging one language or the other
in different contexts, and for different reasons. Participants talked about the ways that
they claimed and stayed connected to their African languages, even as they received their
schooling in a context where the English-only policy was enforced, often through the use
of corporal punishment and manual labor. Other participants’ experiences will reflect the
ways that they reclaimed their African languages later in life after those languages were
215 relegated to inferior positions earlier on. Secondly, under the subtheme of honoring
students’ home languages, I will present participants’ experiences of the ways that they
endeavored, as teachers, to honor their students’ home languages as a way to (re)claim
African languages and identities as valid languages that have value in students’ literacy
learning. The Kenyan context section will then end with a discussion of the two
subthemes.
Nuances of Language and Identity Affiliations
In different ways, and to differing degrees, participants (re)claimed their African
languages and identities, even as they embraced the English language. As earlier
explained, I put the parenthesis in (re)claiming to mean that while some participants
claimed their African languages and identities all through their schooling, and later in
life, other participants initially did not place a lot of value in these languages, but later
reclaimed them. The nuances of participants’ language and identity affiliations were
evident in the analysis of data, as will be presented in this section.
Kariuki was highly enthusiastic about his African language, Kikuyu, throughout
our interviews. He spoke very fluent English, but he would sometimes switch to Swahili
(which I understand), and even Kikuyu (which I do not understand), to express certain
points. Whenever he said something in Kikuyu, he would translate it for me since I do not
understand the language, being Kisii myself. Kariuki grew up in the city and was fluent
in both English and Swahili from quite early on in his life. He was driven to learn his
mother tongue, Kikuyu, by a desire to connect with the language, and with his rural home
environment. In the excerpt that follows, he explained his connection to Kikuyu:
216 I am proud of my language as a Kikuyu. So during the school holidays, I never
spent any extra day in Nairobi. I always wanted to go to the rural area to learn
more Kikuyu and to interact. Because I found the rural area so spacious, a lot of
freedom to move around, to eat mangoes. So even when I was through with
primary school and got an admission in Nairobi, I refused and went to a day
school in the rural area. But interestingly, up to today they say I speak broken
Kikuyu. (Interview 1 with Kariuki, 6-14-2014).
Kariuki was deeply connected to the Kikuyu language and to his rural home. So much so
that although he got admission to a high school in Nairobi, he decided to go to a rural
high school instead. This is contrary to the ideas some participants expressed in chapter
four that coming from Nairobi was seen as superior to being from the village. In that
case, people in the rural areas would want to go to school in Nairobi, or try to imitate
people from Nairobi, and not the other way around. But Kariuki’s love for his language
and culture drew him to want to study in his rural area. Despite putting in a lot of effort
though, Kariuki noted that his Kikuyu was still considered “broken.” According to
Anzaldùa (1987), it is typical for individuals with hybrid border identities to be in
between languages and cultures, never fitting in completely in either one. As evidenced
by his “broken” Kikuyu, Kariuki did not fully fit in as a speaker of the Kikuyu language.
Similarly, as was apparent in his descriptions of his experiences with English in chapter
four, he did not fully fit in as a speaker of the English language either. Kariuki
maintained, throughout our interviews, a strong connection to Kikuyu, and he privileged
Kikuyu as a language he was proud of.
217 Kariuki’s enthusiasm for speaking the Kikuyu language was not always met with
the same enthusiastic attitude. Some people found it irritating when he spoke to them, or
to other people, in Kikuyu, as Kariuki points out in this excerpt:
Unlike my colleagues, who strain so much to learn English and Kiswahili, for me
it was the other way around. I wanted to learn more Kikuyu and to engage in
conversations in Kikuyu, which brought me into problems. Like people would
ask, why are you speaking in Kikuyu? Because if I find a fellow Kikuyu, I don’t
like conversing in Kiswahili or English. And some people kind of get irritated.
Some of my friends used to get irritated. “Why are you guys speaking in… I
mean!” (Interview 1 with Kariuki, 6-14-2014).
The dilemma of loving a language that is highly stigmatized was real for Kariuki. Having
gone to a primary school in Nairobi, the speaking of African languages was not very
prevalent in the school, and while his friends were striving to learn and speak in English
and Swahili, Kariuki was rocking the boat by speaking Kikuyu and in the process,
annoying some people.
You would find some who would shy away from Kikuyu. They are Kikuyus but
they shy away. Even in primary school. When I come back from the rural areas, I
am eager to kind of experiment with them. They shy away. Looking back now,
either they were not fluent, so they would shy away from it. So that’s one way of
looking at it. Some maybe they just don’t want to be associated to it. (Interview 1
with Kariuki, 6-14-2014)
As Kariuki pointed out in the excerpt above, Kikuyu was a language that some people did
not want to be associated with, but despite this lack of enthusiasm from his peers, Kariuki
218 maintained a strong pride in his African language throughout his schooling and into his
adulthood. Whenever he was around other speakers of the Kikuyu language who were
willing to speak the language, he spoke Kikuyu. However, he had to negotiate the
contexts in which he spoke this language since, as some participants, including Kariuki,
revealed in chapter four, some Kenyans frown upon the speaking of African languages,
linking it to tribalism and lower social class. Kariuki moved in between these languages,
often facing some resistance, but nonetheless choosing to privilege Kikuyu in contexts
where he felt it was appropriate to do so.
Kariuki also faced a clash of identities whenever he went to his rural home. The
other children in his village saw Kariuki as someone that could be key to helping them
learn the English and Kiswahili languages. The rural children were already fluent in their
vernacular language, and were thus interested in a reciprocal engagement where they
learned English and Kiswahili from Kariuki, and Kariuki learned Kikuyu from them. But
being from Nairobi, Kariuki was not very fluent in the kind of “pure” Kiswahili that they
were trying to get from him. He was more comfortable with an in between language,
sheng’, which is a less formal type of Kiswahili that is mixed with English and other
languages.
When we converse with them in Kiswahili, they would make an attempt to
converse in pure Kiswahili. Which for me, when I start speaking in pure
Kiswahili, was putting a strain on me. Because it’s not a formal setup. Because I
associate pure Kiswahili in a formal conversation. But sheng’, which is a
corruption of Kiswahili and English and some bit of mother tongue here and
there, is more of informal. I would be more comfortable to engage them in an
219 informal conversation with sheng’. I want to converse in Kikuyu and they want to
converse in Kiswahili. But the kind of Kiswahili they would want is not the one
that I would want to engage in. They want to engage in formal, what they are
taught in school, which I am comfortable with. But I am only comfortable
conversing in that kind of Kiswahili in a formal setup, but not with my friends
relaxing. That was now the problem. (Interview 1 with Kariuki, 6-14-2014)
Kariuki was facing expectations from his rural friends to be a support in their learning of
a “pure” form of Swahili, while to him, that did not fit in with the context or with the
relationships he had with these friends. In that context, he was more comfortable
claiming either Kikuyu, or sheng’ as a hybrid language, which was more suited to the
way that he wanted to portray himself in those relationships.
Kariuki’s commitment to Kikuyu comes through strongly in the experiences
presented in this section. I will point out here though that Kariuki was equally
enthusiastic about English, as was evident in the ways that he and other teachers enforced
the language policy in their school (see chapter four for more on this). Personally, he had
a deep love for Kikuyu and a deep desire to learn the language, but professionally, as a
teacher, he was forced to enforce the English-only policy and stress to his students that
they were “professionals” and needed to represent themselves as such by speaking in
English. Living in the in-between space of embracing both languages, he practiced both
identities as a speaker of Kikuyu and a speaker of English, but neither language fully
defined him.
Another participant, Sally, also had a complex relationship with English and with
the two African languages, Kikuyu and Kimeru, that she considered her vernacular
220 languages. In chapter four, I shared findings that Sally recounted participating, as a young
student in a school culture where African languages and accents were stigmatized, in
laughing at and making fun of those students that had African vernacular-influenced
accents in their spoken English. At that point in her life, she thought it was funny and
would participate in humiliating those students. But even as she did that, Sally spoke both
Kikuyu and Kimeru at home with her family, and she had a special connection with both
languages, as can be seen in the quote that follows:
They (Kikuyu and Kimeru) have a special place in my life. Because I feel that I
express myself better when I use those languages with my family and friends. I
feel like I am getting understood more, and I can reach more people who matter to
me. (Interview 1 with Sally, 7-5-2014)
The contradictions in Sally’s experiences were not uncommon in the interviews of other
participants in this study. Making fun of African languages and accents among school
children, and sometimes teachers, was often considered to be all in good fun. Although
the effects of this shaming of African languages and accents were clearly evident, for
example, when those that got laughed at became silent and withdrawn (see chapter four
for more on this), the people that did the shaming often did not consider their actions
anything but a natural part of English language learning. Making fun of vernacularinfluenced accents was supposed to be funny, but it did not seem to mean that the
participants did not love their own languages.
Some participants, like Mercy and Isaac, expressed regret at either not having
learned their vernacular language themselves, or not having taught their children to speak
those languages. As explained in chapter four, Mercy felt that in some ways, she
221 sacrificed her mother tongue while learning English and Swahili. She went to a school
(she got both her primary and secondary education at the same school) where the
majority of students were either Indian or white, and speaking African languages in the
school was almost unheard of. After completing secondary school, she went to a different
school for her A-levels (an advanced level high school everyone had to attend before
going to college in the old system of education in Kenya). The language situation in that
school was very different from her former school, as Mercy explains in the excerpt that
follows:
I ended up in a situation where people would use English in class, but outside the
classroom, it was Luo. And what you had to do, you had to speak Luo properly. If
you were speaking it as if you don’t quite, like you are not a Luo, you’re from
another tribe and you’re learning it, there was almost like a stigma attached to it.
You know like, “Oooh a city girl! How can you not speak your mother tongue
properly?” I experienced almost some stigma there. Even when we used to go
upcountry, that’s how we used to feel. So we would shy away from speaking Luo
where there were people. Because the moment we spoke they would say, “These
ones are speaking Luo as if they are people from another tribe who are learning
Luo.” (Interview 1 with Mercy, 6-15-2014)
Not unlike Kariuki, whose Kikuyu was considered “broken”, Mercy did not fully fit in as
a speaker of the Luo language. At that point in her life, other Luo speakers thought she
did not speak Luo “properly” and as such, she did not fully have membership in that
culture. Mercy explained that in an effort to rectify that, she had to do something.
222 I polished! I had to style up! I really really polished my Luo. In fact it was like I
made up for all that time I had lost. I really polished up my Luo. Because I didn’t
want the stigma. And you know people would just tell you in your face, “Why are
you talking Luo as if you are someone from another tribe?” So I really polished
up my Luo. (Interview 1 with Mercy, 6-15-2014)
During her A-levels schooling, Mercy worked to reclaim her African language. Going to
a school where the language was not valued had facilitated her putting Luo in a
secondary position after English and Swahili, but suddenly being surrounded by other
speakers of the language, who stigmatized her for not speaking it “properly” enough,
reawakened her desire to reclaim that part of her identity.
In this context, being called a “city girl” was a negative, as it implied that she had
lost touch with her African language and culture. This is in sharp contrast to Sally’s
secondary school (where students were slightly younger, given that Mercy’s school was
an A-levels school, which is the next level up after secondary school and before
university in the old education system in Kenya). In Sally’s secondary school, as seen in
chapter four, being called a “born town”, which is synonymous with a “city girl”, was
considered a positive that others admired and sought to emulate, because it meant that the
person spoke English better than those from the rural areas. However, Mercy’s
experience at her A-levels school was that one did not want to be labeled a “city girl”,
because this label carried the stigma of being disconnected from one’s African language
and identity.
Similarly, in the case of Daniel, speaking in English was a negative in his village.
Throughout our interviews, Daniel privileged the English language and dominant
223 identities, as seen in chapter four and elsewhere in this chapter. Daniel received some
pushback for speaking English in his village. He recounted that in his village, one was
scorned and considered prideful if they spoke English.
Daniel: When I came home, now to our rural home from Nairobi, I don’t think
even English was spoken. Maringo inaitwa aje? (Translates to: what’s maringo
called?)
Nyaboke: Pride
Daniel: Pride. You are just being proud for nothing, you know?
Nyaboke: When you speak English?
Daniel: Yeah. So it’s like you want to show people you can, you know? So that is
something you, of course, had to be conscious about. There is a way a community
just wants to coalesce together. They do not want anyone to out-shoot. So if you
speak better than anyone, they will just bring you down. (Interview 1 with Daniel,
6-2-2014)
Daniel was caught in between wanting to be good in English and being able to be
accepted in his community. In the last part of the excerpt above, he revealed that he
viewed his community as trying to bring him down because he spoke “better” than them.
This indicates that Daniel privileged speaking in English and viewed it as being better.
Daniel went on to reveal that for a while, he avoided speaking English, because he did
not want to be seen as proud, or trying to “out-shoot” other people. To keep the peace, he
suppressed his English until he found an environment that supported his speaking of
English, as he explains below:
224 I think I was conscious of that kind of peer pressure. So I would not really exceed
expectations of my environment, and I stayed within there. And I think that was
the case until I went to (name of high school removed for confidentiality), and I
had that environment in the staffroom where teachers showed some confidence in
me. (Interview 1 with Daniel, 6-2-2014)
Both African languages and English were suppressed, to varying degrees, depending on
the context. For Daniel, he came from the village environment, where speaking English
was read negatively, to his high school environment, where he received praise and
recognition for his English. He therefore had to learn to navigate the two identities, and
code-switch as necessary, depending on the context.
Unlike Daniel, who privileged English whenever he could, Isaac struggled with
the English language throughout his schooling. It was therefore natural for him to claim
and privilege his African language, Duruma. As earlier established, Duruma was very
closely related to Swahili, and so to Isaac, Swahili was like a second mother tongue.
However, as much as Isaac loved to speak Duruma, he found that it became difficult for
him to pass the language on to his children, as he explained in the excerpt that follows:
I always feel proud speaking that language, my mother tongue, even more than
Swahili. Despite the fact that someone can easily challenge me. In my house we
don’t speak it. It’s unfortunate. Even though I like my language, but because of
probably cross marriage, it becomes very difficult for me and my family. So we
end up speaking Swahili, me and my wife and the kids. So the kids basically
speak Swahili. But still I like my language. I speak it most of the time I get an
225 opportunity to, which makes me tied to my culture. (Interview 1 with Isaac, 7-22014)
Isaac had strong personal connection to Duruma, though he also mentioned that
“someone can easily challenge me” in the language. As an insider to Kenyan expressions,
I know this to mean that he was not completely fluent in the language, and so someone
could challenge him on it. He could however speak a decent amount of it, and so for him,
the unfortunate part was that his kids spoke Swahili and not Duruma. He also had adult
cousins that were scrambling to learn and reclaim their mother tongue as adults because,
due to an urban upbringing, they did not learn those languages when they were younger.
When we go home and find our kids out there, they are playing and are speaking
Swahili instead. Back in the rural areas. We feel we are wasting the generation.
We feel like our language is dying out. And the problem is, I don’t think we have
had any serious initiative to change the trend. We just end up talking about it and
it ends there. But one thing I would emphasize, it doesn’t even start with our
generation. Even those who are our age group and were brought up in town, that
has been the trend. But the good thing is when they grow older, they really strive
to learn the language. They end up trying to speak the language because they want
to identify themselves with the language they come from. Like most of my
cousins who when we were growing up, they couldn’t even speak the language.
Most of them have grown up in Mombasa. But now as they have grown older,
they are really speaking more of the mother tongue. They really want to feel like
they are part of the community. I feel like they lost part of their childhood to learn
their language properly. So sort of, they are trying to compensate. Sometimes you
226 want to speak with them in Swahili, but they are speaking mother tongue. Even
some of the words still they make mistakes in them. Because they are not as fluent
as we are. (Interview 3 with Isaac, 7-11-2014)
Like with Mercy, the push to reclaim African languages was also a prominent part of
Isaac’s interviews. He felt that somehow, “we are wasting the generation” by allowing
African languages to die out without making much of an effort to pass them to the next
generation. Isaac however saw some hope in the fact that some of his cousins were
making an effort to reclaim their African languages even at an older age. Having been
raised in urban areas, the mother tongues had taken a backseat to English and Swahili,
but as adults, they were making room in their identities for, and seeking to reclaim these
languages by learning them in their adult years.
Honoring Students’ Home Languages
In the Kenyan context, the second subtheme under (re)claiming African languages
and identities was the subtheme of honoring students’ home languages. In this section, I
will present participants’ experiences of the ways that they navigated the realities of
teaching in English while also recognizing that their students were multilingual learners,
some with difficulties in English. Participants recounted their experiences of helping
students navigate their multilingualism in different ways. Some participants (re)claimed
African languages, which were suppressed by the English-only policy in the schools, by
allowing students to express themselves in the language that they felt best served their
ideas, and other participants made exceptions only in certain situations and contexts. In
doing this, participants honored students’ home languages as valid languages that
students could use to enrich and support their literacy learning.
227 Participants reported trying to be accommodating of students’ home languages,
even though they were operating under a policy that rejected the use of African languages
in school. In some cases, even Swahili was discouraged even though Swahili is taught in
school as a subject. In some schools, students did not speak their mother tongues, but
instead spoke Swahili or sheng’. Kariuki, for example, taught at a city school where
students did not speak their vernacular languages as much due to the mix of students
from different linguistic backgrounds. However, those students still struggled with
English, and for them, their home language was sheng’, an in between language that is a
mix of Swahili, English, and any number of African languages.
It was a language preferred by most boys. It’s a day-to-day use language. Those
kinds of youth like freedom, detachment, independence. All those bound together.
Like it’s a language of association. So the sense of belonging to a certain clique,
where we are shutting out the adults from our conversation. It is a language they
used more often because it brought about cohesiveness amongst the youths,
amongst the students. (Interview 3 with Kariuki, 9-21-2014)
As Kariuki pointed out in the excerpt above, the students were using this language as a
way to express their youth and independence. It was the language of their generation, a
language that often made its way into the classroom. Kariuki had to find ways to work
with this language in his classroom, as he explained in the excerpt that follows:
At that time maybe I was young. That time I started teaching and I could identify
with them. I don’t think I was as strict. I don’t think I was so strict in terms of I
have to speak to them in a certain way. It depended on the context. In classroom,
when I am teaching, I would try to adhere to the formal language, and that is
228 English. English is the language of instruction. Because that is what the
curriculum dictates. But in regards to receiving responses from students, I would
not be so strict. I would meet every student at their point of competency in terms
of expression. So I wouldn’t say, “Whatever you have answered, can you repeat
now in proper English?” That one, I wouldn’t do that. But outside during games
or sports maybe, I would once in a while try to show them maybe I know a little
bit of Sheng’ as a point. You know as teachers, you struggle to balance so many
things. At one point you are an authority. At the same point, you do not want to
put some kind of wall. Let them know that you enjoy some of the music that they
listen to. You can go with what they say is the flow. (Interview 3 with Kariuki, 921-2014)
Kariuki was in a position where, as he pointed out “At one point you are an authority. At
the same point, you do not want to put some kind of wall”. He had to find an in between
space where he could honor that school’s language policy by teaching in English, while
also trying honor the students’ preferred language (sheng’) by not attaching any stigmas
to the language. Kariuki made attempts to speak some sheng’ to his students in order to
develop relationships with them and avoid putting up walls that would make it difficult
for him to reach them.
However, as much as Kariuki tried to honor this language that the students
brought into his classroom, there were obstacles that he had to face, as he explains in the
excerpt that follows:
In terms of instruction, classroom instruction, I adhered to the language of
instruction. I would also deviate if I needed to explain a certain concept. In terms
229 of grading, I would try to encourage them. I would try to explain concepts in class
in whatever language. But let’s be fair, the grading of your final examination
would depend on how well you can be able to express yourself in English. So in
as much as I encouraged them to use any form of expression, any language of
expression, even Sheng’, I told them there is no name like chemistry “sodium”.
There is no way of, even if your Sheng’ is so dynamic to changes, we don’t have
a name for sodium. (Interview 3 with Kariuki, 9-21-2014)
While honoring students’ home language, in this case Sheng’, Kariuki also had to
emphasize the importance of acquiring academic language specific to the content area
that he was teaching as there were no substitutes to those terminologies that they could
use when it came to testing. Kariuki therefore moved in between emphasis on English
and making room for Sheng’ in order to ensure that his students were getting the
instruction and learning experiences that they needed in his classroom.
Another participant, Faith, would also sometimes use Kiswahili to explain or
emphasize a point to her students. She however tried to stick with English most of the
time. And although once in a while she could resort to Kiswahili where she thought
necessary, she made a point to never used Kikuyu in her instruction, even though the
majority of her students were Kikuyu. Being multilingual in English, Kiswahili, and
Kikuyu, however, enabled her to draw on her linguistic capital in Kiswahili to help
students when explaining concepts in English did not seem to be working for some
students.
I mainly used English, though at times I could chip in Swahili, especially when I
needed to emphasize and explain for the student to understand. Because in that
230 school, it was an average school and students were average. So I felt that maybe if
I also try to explain in a language which is easier for them, they might understand.
So at times, maybe one or two situations, I could chip in some Swahili word. I
mostly had to teach in English and try to explain using Swahili so that they could
really understand what I want them to get. So I think that is whereby now the
advantage of being a multilingual person came in very clearly for me. Because I
felt that these students were struggling with English. So I could try to explain to
them whatever I really wanted them to understand even using my Swahili. But
there is no single point I can remember that I used vernacular, my mother tongue,
no. So for me as a teacher, I just decided I will focus mainly on the national
language.” (Interview 3 with Faith, 6-24-2014)
Faith felt that as a teacher, it was her responsibility to use the national languages, English
and Swahili, in her teaching. Although English was the language of instruction, she felt
that she could use Swahili when needed in order to help her students understand what she
was teaching. However, for Faith, African languages were not permissible in the
classroom. From Faith’s account, above, of her experiences, there was still a hierarchy of
languages that privileged English, and to a lesser extent, Kiswahili. Faith felt a
responsibility to privilege these languages, at least in the classroom, and the compromise
she felt she could make was to allow Kiswahili n some instances, rather than insisting on
the English-only policy. Outside of the classroom was a different matter, as Faith
explained in the excerpt below:
Sometimes we could even get to a point of telling the student, “Just speak with a
language you can understand,” especially if it is mainly outside or a student really
231 wants to explain to you more about whatever he or she is going through.
Especially those are some situations whereby you could find that the student is
really struggling to speak out and to bring out what he or she wants. So at that
time we could just encourage them, “Just speak with your language,” so that at
least you understand as a teacher. (Interview 3 with Faith, 6-24-2014)
Like Kariuki, Faith was in between the role of a teacher charged with upholding the
language policy in their school, and the role of a teacher trying to ensure that they can
reach and making learning accessible to all their students. She therefore had to make
decisions about what contexts were appropriate for what kinds of action with regards to
the languages that she used, or allowed students to use.
Having a multilingual background that afforded her an understanding of what it
felt like for a student to not be confident about their fluency in a second language, Faith
worked to create a classroom environment that was welcoming for students to speak up in
English without fear of humiliation because of their level of fluency or their accents.
One of the things that I used to do was just to create that environment as a teacher,
such that when a certain student is speaking, and even he or she makes a mistake,
the other students should not laugh at him or her. So we were really keen on that.
Because we realized that at some point it was very intimidating for some students.
Because they realized that, “Every time I speak, it’s like I don’t really speak well.
And some students laugh at me”. So that keeps them off speaking. So we were
really trying to encourage these students. We try to talk to the students generally
and tell them, “You have to persevere with each other because we are all learning
and we want to be better.” (Interview 3 with Faith, 6-24-2014)
232 Laughing at students who spoke with vernacular-influenced accents was a major problem
in schools, as it silenced those students that were laughed at (see chapter four for more on
this). Although Faith discouraged African languages in her classroom, she worked to
create a classroom environment that was respectful of students’ accents, as she wanted
those students to be able to participate in the learning process without fear of being
ridiculed.
Like Faith and Kariuki, Sally found herself in a position whereby she had students
who sometimes needed her to explain content in a language other than English. She
would sometimes oblige and use Kiswahili, but not without considering the implications
of doing so. She explained this in the excerpt that follows:
During the lesson, if I found students did not understand a concept in English,
then I would just say it in Kiswahili. Though rarely, but I would. Ok my argument
was, I can’t just leave it at that. Let me try a little. Then the students would say,
“ooooh!”. They would then understand. But then I just found under the
circumstances, I wasn’t sure whether encouraging the dual language would be to
the students’ advantage. Because they would be expected to write these concepts
in exam in English. So if I encourage them to think in Kiswahili, Kikuyu, or
Kimeru, which I wouldn’t, I would really lose my job. I really didn’t know what
implication that would have, encouraging them to get so much into Kiswahili if
the subject is not Kiswahili that they are learning. (Interview 3 with Sally, 7-132014)
In addition to being concerned about using Kiswahili and other African languages to
explain concepts to students when their examinations were in English, Sally was also
233 faced with the possibility of losing her job if she were perceived as not following the
school’s language policy. Sally had to tread carefully as a teacher in that situation, even
though she found the situation disappointing, as she explained in the excerpt that follows:
It could be so disappointing to find that the students could not express what they
knew. Simple concepts, simple ideas, they could not put them on paper in an
intelligible manner. But if asked to say it in their mother tongue, they would very
effectively do so. And then year in year out, we presented these kids for
examinations and then the results just show it’s like this kid didn’t go to school.
They didn’t learn anything. So I still keep asking myself whether that was really
the right thing to do to the students and parents. Telling them your child after four
years did not learn anything. Whereas if you told them to say what they learnt in a
different language, they really would. (Interview 3 with Sally, 7-13-2014)
Sally was torn by the knowledge that the students were perceived as having learned
nothing, when in reality, they had learned something, except they could not express what
they had learned in English. And the examinations were unforgiving since there was no
room to express their knowledge in anything but English.
Because most participants expressed frustration at the English-only policy in
many Kenyan schools, and also at the Kenyan education system, which places a lot of
emphasis on standardized tests written in English, and thus restricts their ability to teach
in ways that honor students’ home languages, I asked them what they would have wanted
to see happen in the schools. In response to this, Jackline talked about her desire for a
situation where formal education in Kenya is conducted using African languages.
Chimbutane (2011)’s study on bilingual education in Mozambique is an example of
234 successful implementation of bilingual education in an African, post-colonial context.
Chimbutane (2011) points out that “[b]ilingual education has also been contributing to
the transformation of rural schools, from being islands detached from the communities
they serve to sites where metropolitan and local knowledge intersect and cross-fertilize.”
(p. 162). According to Jackline, using African languages in teaching would make content
easier for students to understand, as she stated in the excerpt that follows:
This one thing I have really been thinking, like why should all learning be done in
English? Can people learn in their mother tongue? I look at it like, if people were
taught mathematics in their mother tongue, how easy could it have been than
when they are being taught in English? I don’t know if that is possible, but
learning in a second language usually comes with a lot of challenges. (Interview 5
with Jackline, 9-29-2014)
Jackline highlighted the difficulties in learning in a second language as a reason she
might be interested in seeing learning occurring in students’ native languages. Although
she was unsure of the possibility of this happening, she saw it as a way to combat the
challenges, some of which are discussed in chapter four, that students faced while
learning in a language that was not their first language. Jackline added to this by saying
that using Kamba names in contexts where the students were Kamba would make
learning more relatable for the students. She envisioned that a situation where learning
was taking place in the students’ first language and the examples used were culturally
relevant to the students would make things easier, as she explains below:
Things will just flow. Because they will just be so easy to understand. Because
you are learning in your mother tongue. It becomes very easy to relate with the
235 knowledge. You don’t see it like something for other people. And then I am
imagining like somebody is teaching and then they are giving examples of Kamba
names. “Yeah, Mueni did this.” So if you are Mueni, and then maybe you came
up with an idea, then you are able to relate well with that. (Interview 5 with
Jackline, 9-29-2014)
Jackline’s point that students can benefit from teachers using culturally relevant
examples, such as local names, in their instructions in order for learners to connect more
with the material that they are learning is supported by the literature. There is extensive
literature that supports the need for culturally relevant instruction, which includes
teachers using students’ native languages and cultures as important aspects of their
literacy learning experiences (Goldenberg & Coleman, 2010; Xu, 2010). While it is
impossible for all teachers to learn all students’ vernacular languages, especially in urban
contexts in Kenya where students come from a multitude of linguistic backgrounds,
teachers can learn about those languages and cultures (Xu, 2010), and use them to inform
their instruction as Jackline suggested.
In explaining why students might not connect very much to instruction when it is
not culturally relevant to them, Jackline said, “you know it’s like there is a feeling like
that thing belongs to those people, those English people” (Interview 5 with Jackline, 929-2014). Jackline felt that there was the possibility of students perceiving the education
that they were receiving as belonging to “those English people” when they did not see
themselves, and their experiences reflected in what they were learning. Jackline
advocated for teaching practices that honored students’ African languages and identities
236 by making classroom experiences reflective of the learners’ linguistic and cultural
backgrounds.
In responding to the same question about what she would have liked to see
happen in the schools, and as a suggestion for helping students with their language needs
without resorting to suppressing African languages, Faith suggested that it is important
for all teachers, including Mathematics teachers like herself, to help students with
language rather than leaving it to the language teachers, as she felt some teachers did.
The participants in this study did not always feel, as content teachers, that it was their
responsibility to help students with their language and literacy needs. Some participants
had linguistic struggles of their own when it came to English, and they were not
enthusiastic about dealing with the language and literacy needs of their students. Faith,
however, reiterates the importance of literacy in the teaching of mathematics.
Language is very important even in teaching mathematics. We always say as
mathematics teachers that mathematics has got its own language. And as teachers,
they have to understand the mathematical language for them to be able to deliver
the content in the right manner. So language is very important even when it comes
to mathematics. Because we find that besides dealing with formulas and
computation skills, we also have some word problems that require a student to
read and understand. And if a student doesn’t connect the language that is used, it
becomes very hard for the student to interpret the question correctly. (Interview 5
with Faith, 6-30-2014)
In addition to recognizing the importance of language and literacy in Mathematics, Faith
pointed out that there is need to change the classroom discourse in Kenyan schools that
237 makes learning mostly teacher centered, thus giving students few opportunities to
practice speaking in English.
Teachers need to put emphasis in the classroom in developing the right classroom
discourse. And especially the communication, ensuring that there is good
communication between student and student, teacher and student. Especially in
group work discussions, which is a rare thing in mathematics. Because in
mathematics, mostly the classrooms are teacher-centered. And we find that mostly
teachers end up doing lecture method. But if they can be able to introduce
something like discussion, a classroom discourse whereby students will be
involved more in speaking with one another, sharing the ideas, trying to use their
language, I think it can really help. What I would really major on as a teacher
educator who has gone through all that, is not necessarily to come up with policy
measures sometimes to even get students to wear sack cloths or even corporal
punishment. I would like them to speak in English, but I think the best would be
coming up with other ways, which could be more helpful to students. Like I’m
talking of initiating discussion groups, which are functional, where students can
contribute their ideas. More like an emphasis in debate clubs and such things,
where a student can just go there and talk. And I think even coming up with
forums. I will be for this because I myself feel that I really like my first language.
And the same case applies to students. And I mean, if they come from the same
tribe, they will always find themselves talking in their first language, which is not
a sin to talk in the first language. So for me I think instead of just punishing them,
why are they not encouraged to take part in debates whereby we can have some
238 speak in their mother tongue others translate? It’s like fun, but at the same time
they are learning. They are proud of who they are, and they learn the importance
of learning all the languages. (Interview 5 with Faith, 6-30-2014)
Rather than using punitive measures, like having students wear sack cloths, or using
corporal punishment, to force students into speaking English, Faith pointed out that she
would like to see teachers shift strategies and use other methods such as creating more
opportunities for students to use the English language without criminalizing their African
vernacular languages. By using languages that they are already familiar with as a
foundation, they can learn language or content area concepts required at their grade level.
Faith’s suggestion that teachers provide opportunities for students to practice speaking
English in a safe environment goes hand in hand with calls by Nora & Wollman (2009),
and Ernst-Slavit, Carrison, & Spiesman-Laughlin (2009) for teachers to provide a lot of
opportunities for learners to use spoken English in the classroom, and for teachers to
create a classroom environment that allows students to feel that it is safe for them to
participate. This can be done by demonstrating to the students that they, including their
languages and cultures, and their contributions are not only accepted, but valued as well.
The research supports the participants’ accounts of their experiences of being
constrained by school policies and standardized testing in their efforts to honor their
students’ African languages. Giroux (2008) and Muthwii (2004) note that one of the
major constraints to teachers’ ability to provide instruction that honors students’ home
languages and cultures is the emphasis on standardized testing. As teachers in Kenya, the
participants reported being faced with this dilemma in their teaching. Kariuki, for
example, used sheng’ where necessary to help his urban students learn science concepts.
239 But he also found that as much as sheng’ was a useful tool for the students’ learning, their
examinations were in English and he had to keep that in mind since examinations were a
major priority. Sally, on her part, feared losing her job if she used students’ home
language in instruction, as this could be perceived to be taking away from the students’
ability to perform well in examinations.
Insistence on a strict English-only policies in classrooms can strip linguistically
and culturally diverse students of their voice and render them powerless in their own
education. Razfar and Rumenapp (2012) note that students are often aware of the
language ideologies and the power and status implications of language practices in their
classrooms. They argue that in order for there to be room for challenging these
discourses, teachers need to open up conversations about language, power, and the
implications of the explicit and implicit language ideologies that exist in their classrooms.
The English-only policy in Kenyan schools denies students their own identities and
voices. Renowned African authors like Ngugi wa Thiong’o use their African languages
and identities to creatively enrich their writing, but such practices are frowned upon, or
even punished, when carried out by multilingual learners in school contexts. However, as
illustrated in this section, some participants, like Kariuki, Sally, and Faith, made some
effort to honor students’ home languages despite the obstacles that were in the way of
their ability to do this.
United States Context
In this section, I will present the participants’ experiences of (re)claiming their
African languages and identities within the U.S. context. In the U.S. context, under the
theme of (re)claiming African languages and identities, two subthemes emerged:
240 Nuances of language and identity affiliations, and African languages and identities as
capital. Like in the Kenyan context section, the parenthesis in (re)claiming is used to
indicate that some participants had always claimed and had close connections to their
African languages and identities, while some participants were reclaiming those
languages and identities later on in their lives.
In (re)claiming their African languages and identities in the U.S., and as the first
subtheme suggests, there were nuances in the participants language and identity
affiliations. Some participants code-switched depending on the context they were in,
some participants sought affiliations with other Africans that spoke some of the same
African languages that they did, and yet others sought affiliations with African
Americans on the basis of their shared identities and experiences as black individuals in
the United States. Some participants also chose to distance themselves from other
Africans and/or African Americans for various reasons. Some participants enacted hybrid
identities since they were navigating a new culture that privileged English and western
identities, while at the same time they were holding on to their own languages and
identities, and finding spaces for both of those realities to co-exist in them. Under the
second subtheme, African languages and identities as capital, I will present findings that
reveal that some participants viewed and used their African languages and identities as
capital.
Nuances of Language and Identity Affiliations
Participants expressed strong connections with their African languages and
identities, even in the U.S. context, where those languages and identities were often
stigmatized and considered a liability in their capacities as students and teaching
241 assistants (see chapter four for more on this). The participants felt some relief and
comfort in opportunities that they got to converse with other Kenyans in either Swahili or
a shared African language. In the excerpt that follows, Nicole explained what this felt like
for her:
When I meet people from Kenya, I will speak to them or with them in Swahili.
And then I will mix with English. I would say that there is that unity that you feel,
that homeliness that you feel when you speak in that language (Swahili) that you
identify with, both of you identify with. So you feel the oneness when you speak
to somebody in a local language. And then you feel like you are revisiting home.
It’s like you have met somebody from home and it’s the only way to connect so
well without having to struggle looking for vocabularies. And then because I am
speaking English throughout, this is like a breather. It is like when you are going
through an interview and an easy question is thrown. You feel like, “oh I have
relaxed!” So it’s like I am relaxing. It’s like I am taking some rest from a lot of
English.
Nicole expressed a strong connection with Swahili, as a language that gave her a feeling
of being at home, and with other Kenyans she encountered in the U.S. In speaking
Swahili, Nicole felt a sense of belonging with those Kenyans. She implied in this excerpt
that speaking in English all the time was exhausting, and as such, any opportunities to
speak in a language she associated with home were like a breath of fresh air and a way
for her to relax, away from the pressures of speaking in English.
Nicole also indicated that she spoke a mix of Swahili and English with other
Kenyans. As Kariuki explained in the previous section (Kenyan context) in this chapter,
242 it is often hard for Kenyans to speak “pure” Swahili or “pure” English in informal
contexts, and often, they take the middle ground of mixing the two languages, and
sometimes even mixing in some words from their vernacular languages. This is indicative
of the hybridity of Nicole’s, and other participants like Kariuki’s, identities. They spoke
multiple languages, but did not necessarily have complete fluency in any one of them.
Rather, they spoke a mix of all the languages, creating a hybrid language (Anzaldùa,
1987) of their own that represented the various identities that they claimed.
Like Nicole, Faith also sought breathers from speaking English all the time by
grabbing at any opportunities that she got to speak her vernacular language, Kikuyu, in
the U.S. Whenever she called home, she enjoyed the opportunity to converse with loved
ones in Kikuyu. Additionally, she often switched to Kikuyu when speaking to other
Kenyans in the U.S. with a similar linguistic background. She explained her relationship
to Kikuyu in the U.S. in the following excerpt:
I think being the first language it just comes naturally. You know, you engage in
your first language comfortably. I also look at the whites, and especially from
America here, I look at them when they are speaking English and I’m like, these
people don’t struggle. Because it’s their first language. They don’t struggle. Most
of them even don’t have a second language. That is the only language they learnt
since they were young. And so to them, it just flows, when I am struggling
speaking it myself. I have to think, then I speak. I think what I want to say. I think
in my mother tongue, I then translate in my mind, and I speak. But them, it just
flows. And I am like the same case when it comes to my mother tongue. I don’t
243 have to think. So it just comes. It will just flow out. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-282014)
Faith compared her relationship with Kikuyu with the relationship white Americans have
with English. She did not include other Americans, like African Americans, in this
description, implying that ownership of the English language belongs to white
Americans. In the same way that she felt white Americans did not struggle with speaking
English, she did not struggle with speaking Kikuyu. In both cases, the first language
came naturally and flowed out without the struggles of speaking a second language,
where one has to go through a longer process when constructing words in order to speak.
Faith therefore felt it was more comfortable for her when she spoke to other Kenyans
from her community in Kikuyu. In the case of other Kenyans from other communities,
Faith felt that Swahili was just as comfortable, as she explains in the quote below:
When I’m with my other Kenyans, and maybe they are not from my tribe, we
switch to Swahili. I think it also naturally flows. You know, like we are not really
struggling trying to think, to create some words in our mind, and then talk. You
know, like in English. So Swahili is a bit easier to converse. So most of the time
we find ourselves chatting and talking in Kiswahili. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-282014)
Swahili and Kikuyu were both unifying languages and languages of comfort for Faith.
She referred to other Kenyans in the U.S. as “my Kenyans”, indicating a closeness and a
sense of belonging that manifested in shared languages.
While Faith was able to find Kenyans from her community in her U.S. university,
and thus had opportunities to speak Kikuyu with them, not all participants enjoyed the
244 same reality. For Daniel, for example, he was from the Embu community, and there were
no other Embus at his university. As such, he did not have people he could speak to in
Embu. There were however, a lot of Kikuyus and Luos around him who grouped together
and spoke their languages a lot. In the excerpt that follows, Daniel explained how those
groupings made him feel:
There are people who naturally group that way. And it’s not everyone. It’s
specifically Kikuyus and Luos. They find strength in their tribe, in my opinion.
And they herd together. So being an Embu, I have to either tag or nothing. So I
don’t like those groups. I get intimidated by them. I have two friends, one Luo,
one Kikuyu. The Kikuyu was closest to me, but he was able to gather another
group of people that completely excluded me. And I start feeling like any
discussion that I participated in, I am actually out of place. You know like people
are talking very serious things, and you come in. It’s like you have actually
broken into a discussion. I would feel an exclusion. But it’s not something that I
would break my neck to try and crack. Actually I feel bad about these kinds of
things. Honestly I feel so bad about them. And the other guy also had a group of
some people from his community, and there would be a very strong connection.
(Interview 4 with Daniel, 6-17-2014).
While for some participants, claiming their African languages and identities in the U.S.
was a positive thing that brought them a sense of comfort and belonging, for Daniel, it
made him feel excluded. Daniel was trying to claim African identities by making friends
with Kenyans from various ethnic communities. But being from a smaller community,
and not having friends from his own community, he experienced some exclusion and felt
245 like an outsider when his Kenyan friends banded together with other Kenyans from their
own communities.
Perhaps as a result of feeling excluded from sub-groups among his Kenyan
friends that were based on ethnic backgrounds, Daniel made deliberate efforts to expand
his circles beyond the Kenyan community around him. The following excerpt explains
Daniel’s feelings about Kenyans at his U.S. university grouping themselves together:
Daniel: I tried very much to also not get local.
Nyaboke: Tell me more about that. By being close with the Kenyan community,
you feel like you would be local?
Daniel: Yeah. And even I think in the Kenyan community, there is the LOCAL
with capital letters, and there is the local with small letters. Local with small
letters is like here we are, just a local Kenyan community. And then within that
community, you herd around people, not because you are doing the same
program, but because you came from the same ethnicity. It’s something I feel bad
about. But also hanging out here as Kenyans for me doesn’t feel right. Honestly to
me it doesn’t feel right. There is comfort zone and there is knowing that you can
speak to another person. (Interview 4 with Daniel, 6-17-2014).
Daniel was both claiming and rejecting the connections that he had with the Kenyans in
his US Kenyan community, as well as the languages that they spoke. While he made
close friendships with Kenyans, he also felt like an outsider in those groups because he
came from a minority ethnic group and did not have the same connections that his friends
had with Kenyans from their own ethnic communities. Daniel sought to widen his circles,
while admonishing what he perceived as groupings based on ethnicity. He also framed
246 his dislike for those groupings as a desire to avoid being “local”, and an attempt to get out
of his comfort zone to interact with other people.
On the other hand, Faith came from a dominant community, Kikuyu, and had a lot
of Kenyan friends in her US community that had the same ethnic background as her. She
told me in our interviews that she had had experiences with Kenyans in her circles in the
U.S. claiming there were groupings based on tribes within those circles. In one of our
interviews, an incident we had both witnessed during a social event with Faith and her
Kenyan friends came up. In the course of this study, Faith and I struck a friendship she
invited me to a Kenyans’ social event at her friend’s house. It was a party with food,
drinks, and dancing, and in the course of the evening, one of the ladies started accusing
people of tribalism. She took offense when someone mentioned that they had had dinner
at another Kenyan’s house. The lady threw a fit, accusing the Kenyans that had had
dinner together of holding secret meetings for Kikuyus and failing to invite other
Kenyans from other tribes. Several people tried to calm her down, assuring her that there
were no secret meetings for Kikuyus and that the dinner was just an innocent dinner
among friends. The lady wasn’t hearing any of it. She made a grand scene that forced the
host to end the party and send everybody home. This incident came up in one of my
interviews with Faith. The excerpt that follows is what Faith shared about it:
I think the person who had come up with the whole issue of people from this
community not inviting others, I think she has her own issues with herself.
Because basically we were not holding a meeting just for Kikuyus and we never
invited others. I think it is very true that we are tribal. Because every person is
proud of where he or she comes from. So it is good to appreciate that we are from
247 different tribes. But we just have to learn to live in peace with one another. So I
think the lady had her own problems, which I may not really be able to tell why
actually she thought that she was not invited to that meeting, which was for
Kikuyus. Because I don’t think there was nothing even like a meeting people had
gone to. They were invited to take some dinner with nothing, no agenda. But I
think maybe she had her own issues. (Interview 4 with Faith, 6-28-2014)
Faith acknowledged that she is proud of where she is from, and her tribe is part of that.
However, she felt that being proud of one’s tribe did not mean that people from different
communities could not live together and be peaceful with each other. Unlike Daniel,
Faith did not see Kenyans sticking together as tribalism, or as a way to be localized. To
Faith, being Kenyan in the U.S. was an important aspect of her identity here, and as she
explained in the excerpt that follows, she felt that Kenyans in the U.S. needed to be
united by their common identity as Kenyans in a foreign country.
Why fight over tribe? We are all Kenyans. When they go out of Kenya, they
realize how important to be a Kenyan is, and just to keep aside your tribal basis,
and just to be a Kenyan. So those are some of the issues that are really aching.
And I hope that our country will get better anyway, that people will live like
Kenyans and not just like Luos, Kikuyus, Kisiis, whatever those tribal basis. Fine,
it is good, but I am looking forward to seeing our country being one, united in one
accord. Whereby they are not looking at each other with a tribal eye, but at least
look at the other person as my brother, my sister. Look at the other like my fellow
Kenyan. Oh my! I am looking forward for that! (Interview 5 with Faith, 6-302014)
248 Evidently, it was not always easy to claim Kenyan languages and identities in the U.S.
without some tensions. However, as Faith pointed out in chapter four, all other
communities, including white Americans, African Americans, and even international
students from other countries, tended to stick together. It was not easy to find a sense of
belonging with other groups, and as such, outside of her Kenyan community, there was a
feeling of being isolated. Mercy made similar observations in her experiences at the U.S.
university she went to. In the excerpt that follows, Mercy talked about her tendency to
seek out friendships with other Kenyans:
I have this habit of checking out Kenyans, and getting excited when I hear about a
Kenyan. I mean it’s something that I almost have to fight to resist. Because I
realized if I continue that way, I will never form any meaningful friendships
during my time here. So like for me, it’s like making friends with an American is
something that I have to really make a conscious effort. Especially because it
takes effort. It’s not like making friends with a Kenyan. You know with a
Kenyan, it’s just like we click. And I tend to just like gravitate to them when I see
them. (Interview 4 with Mercy, 6-28-2014)
For Mercy, socializing with Americans took work and some effort, unlike seeking out
other Kenyans, which was easier due to shared identities as international Kenyan students
in the U.S. She however shared Daniel’s concern about not being able to expand their
circle of friends if they focused too much attention on making friends with or hanging
around other Kenyans. While Mercy acknowledged this as a concern, she still made a lot
of her social interactions with other Kenyans in the U.S. community where she lived and
studied.
249 As seen in chapter four, Mercy faced some racist treatment in the classes where
she worked as a teaching assistant, and although she had to operate in that environment as
a student and a teaching assistant, socially, she found respite in the relationships that she
built with other Kenyans in the U.S. For participants like Mercy, Nicole, and Faith,
claiming their languages and identities as Kenyans in the U.S. was a way to find a sense
of belonging, and to find some respite from the challenges of being black and
multilingual in a U.S. university.
Another participant, Eva, found her respite and community with a group of
African American women in the U.S. As seen in chapter four, Eva spent a lot of time
throughout her schooling in Kenya trying to distance herself from African vernacular
languages, and from Swahili. In order to fit into the elite national school that she went to,
she had to speak only in English, and English with an American or British accent at that.
So for Eva, when she arrived in the U.S., it was time to redefine herself, as she recounts
in the excerpt that follows:
During this time, I was struggling with my identity as an African woman in the
U.S. I had not understood myself, and I was turning 30 by then. And I had to
make some decisions on myself, on what diction would I have? Would I speak
African, African American, or would I sound American? How would I carry
myself around? (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
When Eva first arrived in the U.S., she was often frustrated and angered by the racism
that she experienced and observed. But through constant conversations with her group of
African American women friends (more about this can be found in chapter four), she got
to a place of acceptance and turned the focus on how she could best embrace her own
250 identity as an African woman while trying to navigate the realities of being black in
America. When it came to language, Eva took time to pick and choose what identities she
wanted to claim, as she explains in the excerpt that follows:
When I came to the states, I went to this private school, and they really were
pushing us to talk with the American accent. So I listened a lot to N.P.R, and I
listened a lot to Oprah. I really have been influenced by the way she tells tales,
you know? I would observe people and see what I wanted to do and what I didn’t
want to do. (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
Eva was deliberate about the way that she redefined herself, adapting the aspects of
American culture that she felt fit in with who she wanted to be, while also reclaiming her
African identities.
When I first met Eva, I noticed that she spoke with a fairly Americanized accent,
sometimes pronouncing even Swahili words with a hint of an American accent. Eva had
learned throughout her time in school and college in Kenya that she had to read her
environment and quickly adapt to it. In Kenya, and particularly in the contexts she had
been in, that had meant speaking only in English and being a snob to people who spoke
Swahili and other African languages. Coming into the U.S., suddenly she was no longer
at the top of the hierarchy when it came to language and identity. She found that she was
now a raced individual, and her language, as well as her skin color, were stigmatized in
this context. Eva’s response to this new reality was to reclaim those identities that she had
worked so hard to distance herself from in the past, as she explains here:
In that setting, I eventually decided I am an African and that there were very
many positive things about being an African. And that I had this knowledge. And
251 I got comfortable with being African. After deciding to live in the U.S., I knew
that I will have to keep my wholeness as I try to fit into the white community. But
not forgetting that I am still African and strike a balance. Plus I realized that I can
never be white. (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
Eva mentioned severally in our interviews that she had always wanted to marry a white
man so that she could have biracial children. Because the biracial children she had known
growing up had had an easier time than her. For example, in boarding school, those
children were favored over children that looked like her. For one thing, they were
allowed to keep their hair long while she and other dark-skinned children like her were
made to cut their hair. Because of these experiences, Eva had fantasized a lot about
marrying out of her dark skin, and having children that would be more likely to have a
better life than she did. But coming to the U.S. forced her to interrogate those beliefs and
think more deeply about who she was in this new context. One of the things she sought to
reclaim and reconnect with was her African language, as she explains in the excerpt
below:
Since I got comfortable with myself being an African, I got to love my language.
And I got to learn it, since my language is a source of knowledge and it’s the
container of my culture. I also believe that there is nothing healthy about raising a
generation without ethnicity. Because your language holds a culture that is a
vessel. And our kids are supposed to drown in it. And not learning it kills a certain
type of knowledge that is in it. (Interview 4 with Eva, 7-21-2014)
Living in the U.S. gave Eva a new perspective as she experienced racism and realized
that the westernized persona she had worked to create over the years was still viewed as
252 African and lacking when she got to the U.S. Eva therefore had to do some soulsearching, form alliances with other black women in the U.S. that enabled them to work
through the common issues that they faced, and work towards an acceptance of herself as
an African. She started to recognize the importance of her African language and identity,
even as she pursued graduate education in the United States.
African Languages and Identities as Capital
The second subtheme under (re)claiming African languages and identities, in the
U.S. context, was the subtheme of African languages and identities as capital.
Participants used their identities as Africans as an asset in their classrooms as graduate
students and as teaching assistants. After working through her identity issues in the U.S.,
Eva decided that her identity as an African was an asset that she could use in her work
and studies, as she points out in the quote below:
I also realized that I could do more work after knowing my identity. And I was
able to speak as an African. And I got to write a lot too. I got to fear knowledge
and do research, and I’m able to share what my people know and what my people
go through. (Interview 3 with Eva, 7-18-2014)
Eva saw her identity as an African as something that could inform her work, and she felt
that having reconnected with this identity, she could speak as an African. As a teaching
assistant in a US classroom, Eva took every opportunity she got to demystify Africa for
her students. Ironically, considering Eva did not speak Swahili in Kenya (not because she
could not, but simply because she was in a school where girls had to speak English in
order to belong), she ended up seeking, and getting, a teaching assistantship as a Swahili
teacher at her university in the U.S. In the excerpt that follows, she explained some of the
253 ways that she used her identity as an African with knowledge of the African culture, and
her knowledge of where her students were coming from with their misconceptions about
Africa:
I teach my students about food, and we name them. We say maini (liver),
matumbo (intestines). Some of them are like, “Eew, who eats that?” And then I
tend to have a talk with them that human beings in the world could for different
purposes. And some certain things were formed out of slavery, where they had to
eat this type of food to survive. So it’s something that is not to be looked down
upon. And clothes, some of those people that walk naked in Africa. And I told
them, when I came here in the summer in America, when I looked at people in the
U.S., I thought they were naked. But it’s the heat. So I teach culture, and I have to
explain some things. So they need to become ambassadors. Demystify Africa of
the way it is looked at. So that understanding that not everyone in Africa is like
they are shown on TV. (Interview 4 with Eva, 7-21-2014)
Eva not only taught her students the Swahili language, but she also taught about African
cultures, and African history. She worked to demystify Africa, and Africans, for her
students, so that they could interrogate some of the ways that the media had
misrepresented Africa to them. Eva had students from different ethnic backgrounds,
including white Americans and African Americans interested in either travelling to an
African country at some point, or simply learning Swahili to connect to a part of their
history, as was the case for some African American students. With a rich diversity of
students, Eva used her own linguistic and cultural identity as capital in making sure that
254 she went beyond teaching the language, to challenging deficit stereotypes about Africans
as well.
Beyond the classroom, Eva also used their African languages and identities as
capital in a transnational sense. For example, although Eva herself had not been keen on
learning her African language, Luhya, she was able to draw on the knowledge and
insights she had received from being a black woman in the U.S. to give her sister, who
lives in Kenya, advice on the importance of their African language. She explains this in
the excerpt that follows:
My sister works in a small town, and she is interested in taking a political
position. And I told her, “You have to learn how to speak. You are not going to be
a politician from a community and you can’t speak Luhya. That doesn’t work.
You have to learn, because the people who you are addressing, most of them are
Luhya, and they want to hear you sounding like them. So the one way for you not
to get lost is to show that you can speak that language.” (Interview 4 with Eva, 721-2014)
Eva embraced her identity as an African, more so after she came to the U.S. and realized
that in this context, she was a raced individual, and as such, she had to find ways to
accept and celebrate herself in the face of marginalization. She encouraged her sister to
learn Luhya, the very language Eva had previously worked hard to disassociate herself
with. Eva reclaimed her African languages and identities and used them as assets in both
her teaching and her personal life.
Another participant, Valerie, also used her Kenyan identity to educate her
undergraduate students about Africa, and to connect with them by introducing aspects of
255 her Kenyan identity to the classroom. She taught various classes, and because some
students were curious about her background, she would sometimes weave her cultural
knowledge, including her knowledge of Swahili, into the lessons. For example, she used
cultural items like the lesso (a large cloth that some Kenyan women tie around their
waists for various occasions), to pick her students’ interest and get them interested in
things, beyond their immediate environment, that they would normally not have been
interested in.
I used different ways of teaching. I would involve them with learning some
Swahili words. One of the famous things the kids would love is if I went with the
lesso and showed them those messages. So I read them out loud and ask, “Why
would you put proverbs or messages on a fabric?” So find different ways to
engage them in things that they may not have been interested in. That motivated
students. (Interview 4 with Valerie, 7-28-2014)
In her work as a teaching assistant in a U.S. university, Valerie got her students to think
about other parts of the world, other groups of people, and to recognize that other people
speak other languages, and they do various creative things like putting wise teachings on
fabric that people wore on a day-to-day basis.
Seloni (2012) points out that international scholars in U.S. universities can use
their multilingualism and diverse cultural backgrounds to introduce diverse, global
experiences into the American university classroom. This is important because othered
identities are often silenced, or ignored in American classrooms, while mainstream
cultures and identities dominate. Like Seloni (2012) participants like Eva and Valerie
256 embraced their multilingualism and diverse cultural backgrounds as assets, and used them
to bring new perspectives to the classes that they taught as teaching assistants.
Conclusion
Chapter five focused on the theme of (re)claiming African languages and
identities. Participants’ experiences, while varied, all demonstrated different kinds of
choices and struggles in relation to (re)claiming their African languages and identities.
The first part of the chapter discussed this theme as it emerged from participants’
experiences in the Kenyan context. The first subtheme in the Kenyan context was the
nuances of language and identity affiliations. There were nuances in the ways that
participants chose to affiliate themselves when it came to language and identity in Kenya.
Some participants told of their experiences claiming their African languages and
identities, even in situations where they were punished or ridiculed for it. Some
participants, while still claiming their African languages, chose to privilege English, and
yet other participants tried to find spaces for both their African languages and English in
their identities, code-switching as needed depending on the context.
Anzaldùa (1987) notes that one cannot separate a person’s language from their
identity, because language is very much a part of the person that speaks it. It is difficult to
simply switch a language off from a person when that language is an integral part of their
culture, and their definition of who they are. While for various reasons (including school
culture, and peer pressure) some participants did not grow up placing a lot of value in
their African languages, some, like Eva, recognized the importance of those aspects of
their identities later in life and made attempts to reclaim those languages and identities.
257 In the second subtheme under the Kenyan context, honoring students’ home
languages, this study found that as teachers, the participants found ways to honor
students’ home languages in their classrooms. For example, they would use Swahili, or
other African languages, to explain difficult concepts when needed. As teachers, they
were in the in-between space of being responsible for enforcing English-only school
language policies, while at the same time recognizing and understanding that not all
students could benefit from an instruction that was conducted entirely in English.
Oftentimes they had to make the decision to make exceptions, especially in situations
where students were having a difficult time understanding a concept when explained in
English.
Other languages, like Sheng’, which is itself a hybrid language that combines
English, Swahili, and African languages, also came into play in urban areas. Kariuki used
this language to connect with his students by using it when speaking to them in order to
break the generational barrier between them, and show them that he understood them as
youth, and as speakers of this dynamic, youthful language.
While the participants made these judgment calls and used languages other than
English with their students for various reasons, there was also the fear that doing so might
have negative consequences for them, such as losing their jobs. However, as Nieto (2002)
points out, “it is only when educators and schools accept and respect who their students
are and what they know that they can begin to build positive connections with them” (p.
280). In many instances, the participants, in their roles as teachers, chose to honor
students’ native languages in order to make connections with them that would facilitate
the students’ learning.
258 In the United States context, the first subtheme under (re)claiming African
languages and identities that was explored was the nuances of language and identity
affiliations. All participants found themselves in between various, sometimes conflicting,
identities. Participants made different choices in the languages and identities that they
privileged, and the communities that they chose to affiliate themselves with. For all
participants, their African identities were important to them. But at the same time, they
were also speakers of the English language, they performed their scholarship in English,
and they had to adapt in different ways to being a part of a U.S. university, and to being a
part of US society. In navigating their identities as students and teachers in the U.S., the
participants were forced to explore issues of race and racism. Race and racism were
issues most participants had not had to deal with in Kenya. But in the U.S., they were
confronted with it on a consistent basis as black, international students. Suddenly, they
were categorized and identified based on their skin color and their languages. These
identities played a large part in how they experienced their classrooms in the U.S.
The second subtheme in the U.S. context in this chapter was African languages
and identities as capital. Under this subtheme, findings indicated that some participants
drew from their African languages and identities in their professional and personal lives.
These languages and identities informed their teaching, and they used them to explore
worlds and cultures with their students that the students might not have had opportunities
to explore before.
These findings add on to existing literature on language in education in the
Kenyan context by revealing the meanings that ten transnational teachers made of their
experiences with language and identity, and the ways that they (re)claimed those
259 languages and identities that were beaten out of them as students. While there is still a lot
of work to be done in pushing back against the suppression of African languages in
Kenyan schools, these findings show that these teachers are taking the steps to (re)claim
those languages both in the Kenyan and the United States contexts.
260 CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
This dissertation has found that the transnational teachers interviewed
experienced marginalization of their African languages and identities in both the Kenyan
and the United States contexts, but they reclaimed those languages and identities as
important assets in their teaching in the English language. In this chapter, I will discuss
the implications of the major findings from this study for literacy research and practice in
Kenyan education, and the implications for educational research and practice in U.S.
universities. The chapter is organized in three sections. The first section revisits the study
and provides a summary of the major findings from the study. The second section
discusses the implications of these findings and makes suggestions based on these
findings for literacy researchers, teachers, and other practitioners in Kenya as well as
suggestions for educational research and practice in U.S. universities. The third section
offers directions for future research.
Revisiting the Study
This dissertation study explored the post-colonial language and identity
experiences of transnational Kenyan teachers in U.S. universities. In chapter one, I
provided a detailed rationale for this work by citing literature that shows that there is a
language problem in post-colonial Africa schools. The literature showed that schools are
some of the major sites of linguistic oppression, and teachers are to a large extent
implicated in the repression of African languages in their classrooms (Kitoko-Nsiku,
261 2007; Maeda, 2009; Muthwii, 2004; Wa Thiong’o, 1986). In light of this information, I
decided to focus this study on the experiences of teachers with language and identity. I
wanted to find out how they experienced being multilingual in Kenyan schools, both in
their time as student, and in their time as teachers. To add another layer to the study, I
decided to focus on participants who were not just Kenyan teachers, but Kenyan teachers
in the U.S. The reason for this was that in addition to their experiences in Kenya (where
African languages are suppressed, but the suppression is seldom explicitly linked to race),
I wanted to hear their experiences with language and identity in a context where their
race was more prominent, and their skin color and language were more explicitly
interconnected. Post-colonial theories and language imperialism theories, which framed
this study, argue that the suppression of non-dominant languages and identities is a way
for Westerners to maintain the status quo, which places those languages and identities at
the bottom of the power hierarchy while Western languages and identities are celebrated
as superior.
Going into the study with this knowledge, I structured the study such that I was
asking questions to find out what the participants’ experiences were with regards to their
languages and identities as African who spoke both non-dominant African languages and
English, which is a dominant language in many contexts in the world.
Qualitative interview methodology was used to collect data, and thematic analysis
was used to answer the research question: What are the post-colonial language and
identity experiences of transnational Kenyan teachers in graduate education programs in
the United States in the following domains: a) their primary and secondary schooling in
Kenya b) their teacher preparation in Kenya c) their teaching experiences in Kenya; and
262 d) their graduate education in the United States? I interviewed ten Kenyan teachers who
at the time of this study were pursuing graduate education in the United States. Each
participant was interviewed five times, with one interview under each of the domains
listed in the research question, and one more interview about their plans and aspirations
for the future. In total, fifty interviews were conducted for this study. Data analysis was
done using thematic analysis, with the research question, and the theoretical frameworks
(post-colonial theories and language imperialism theories) guiding the analysis process.
Discussion of Findings
The findings from this study are discussed in chapters four and five. In the pages
that follow, I will provide summaries and discussions of the findings from this study. The
summaries are organized by themes and subthemes, similar to the organization of the
findings in chapters four and five. Before summarizing the findings from this study, I will
provide a brief overview of what the reviewed literature in chapter two revealed that
helped inform the design of this study. In chapter two, I reviewed studies that showed
that although many post-colonial African countries, including Kenya, have policies that
allow for mother tongue education in the early grades, this policy is often not
implemented for a number of reasons, including that the government does not back up
this policy with the appropriate resources that would make it possible to implement
(Nyaga and Anthonissen, 2012), the teachers felt it was best to initiate a focus on English
as early as possible (Jones, 2014), and that parents and communities did not always
support the idea of their children being taught in African languages (Campbell & Walsh,
2010; Jones & Barkhuizen (2011); Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007; and Tembe and Norton, 2008).
These studies revealed that the English was preferred and emphasized from early on in
263 students’ schooling, while in many cases, African languages were stigmatized as being
wrong and unacceptable for school. Although English was introduced early and
emphasized in schools, a study by Onchera (2013) found that students at the secondary
school level still had difficulty in oral communication in English, which made it difficulty
for the students to participate fully in the learning process. This dynamic led to situations
where teachers did most of the talking in class, and students became passive receivers of
knowledge (Onchera, 2013). A study by Spernes (2012) indicated that students displayed
more sophisticated literacy skills when they were allowed to express their ideas in Nandi
(their mother tongue), a language that was otherwise not allowed in school.
Reviewed literature from the United States context revealed that language was a
major area of stigmatization and marginalization for non-native speakers of English in
education in the U.S. (Pailliotet, 1997), as well as for linguistic minority teachers in U.S.
universities (Haddix, 2010), and for international students from African nations
(Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; WamwaraMbugua & Cornwell, 2010). In all of these studies, the stigmatization of language was
closely linked to race and nationality. In the studies on African international students and
teaching assistants in U.S. universities (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, &
Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010), it was revealed that
race often only became an issue for the African students once they came to the United
States. These groups of students and teaching assistants were not often raced in their
countries of origin, and in the U.S., it was a shock for many of them that they were
grouped and judgments were made about them (including judgments about their
264 intelligence) based on their skin color and their language (Constantine, Anderson, Berkel,
Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005; Gatua, 2014; Wamwara-Mbugua & Cornwell, 2010).
The studies discussed above tell us what we already know about the topic of study
in this dissertation. In the section that follows, I will present a summary of the findings
from the current study.
Chapter four focused on the theme of marginalization. Participants revealed that
they experienced marginalization in both the Kenyan and United States contexts. In the
Kenyan context, four subthemes emerged in the data under the theme of marginalization,
as summarized below:
Punishing students’ use of African languages
The participants were punished for speaking African languages in school. The
punishments included corporal punishment where they were caned by their teachers,
manual labor (like being asked to dig in the school farm, cut grass, or clean classrooms an
bathrooms), and public humiliation (like being called names, being made to wear sack
cloths, or being given the monto). Speaking African languages in or outside of the
classroom was considered wrong, and although in most cases, teachers spoke these
languages in school themselves, they punished students for doing the same.
Silencing African languages and identities
As a result of the stigma that was attached to African languages and African
accents, the participants reported being silenced in various ways. For example, Sally said
that in the primary school that she went to, African languages and accents were so
stigmatized that some students would not open their mouths to speak at all in school
because speaking would either lead to punishment for even accidentally saying a non-
265 English word, or ridicule from other students, and sometimes from teachers, for not
speaking “correctly”.
Hierarchy of languages and identities
The participants’ experiences also revealed a hierarchy of languages that placed
English at the top of the hierarchy and African languages at the bottom. For example, Eva
went to national schools where she and her peers spoke in English and looked down upon
anyone that spoke Swahili or any other African language. Eva recounted that there was
an expectation that they spoke English with either a British or an American accent, even
though most of them had never been to either of these countries.
Resisting the marginalization of African languages and identities
This study also revealed that participants resisted the marginalization of their
African languages and identities. Jackline, for example, noted that in her school, some
students would sometimes hide during games time so that they could speak their native
languages without fear of being caught. Isaac also noted that they would offer bribes to
their peers when they were caught speaking their African language so that their peers
wouldn’t report them. These were forms of resistance because although they knew that
speaking in African languages was considered wrong, they found ways to speak these
languages because, as some participants insisted, it was not possible to separate them
from their native languages. As teachers, the participants also resisted the marginalization
of their African languages and identities. Participants, including Isaac, Kariuki, Faith, and
Mercy, reported speaking their African languages with colleagues in the staffroom even
though they were aware of their schools’ English-only policies.
266 In the United States context, participants also experienced marginalization of their
African languages and identities as summarized in the following sub-themes:
Becoming raced
Participants came from Kenya, where for most of them, race was not something
that featured prominently, or even at all, in the way that they defined themselves, to the
United States, where race was one of the most prominent markers of their identity.
Valerie, for example, noted that it was unsettling for her when she arrived in the U.S. and
realized that she had to take ownership a history and an identity that she had not had to
reckon with before. She realized that now she was considered black, and in some ways,
she had to educate herself on and take ownership of the histories and experiences of other
black people in the U.S.
Linguistic and racial stereotyping in the U.S.
Participants were marginalized and stereotyped based on their racial and linguistic
identities. For example, participants like Faith and Sally recounted that their white
classmates often assumed they had nothing to contribute in class and would sometimes be
dismissive of their ideas. Faith and Mercy also recalled experiences with their students as
teaching assistants where students showed open preference for white teaching assistants,
bypassing them to seek assistance from the white teaching assistants instead. Faith also
noted that because of her accent, and race, sometimes her students would be dismissive of
her when she was trying to help them in class.
Silencing of African languages and Identities
Silence was often a result of the prejudice that the participants experienced both
as students and as teaching assistants in US classrooms. Isaac, for example, was very
267 uncomfortable in his classes when he first arrived as a PhD student. He could not
understand most of what the professors were saying, and he often had to fill in the gaps of
his understanding with assumptions and guesses. He did not feel comfortable speaking up
about his own discomfort, and nobody asked him, so he suffered in silence until he was
thrown out of the program for failing his comprehensive examinations.
Responses to marginalization
All participants had experiences of being marginalized in the United States in one
way or the other, and they also all had different ways to responding and coping with the
marginalization. While some participants like Valerie actively resisted marginalization,
others like Faith recognized it as a problem but focused their attention on trying to
achieve their academic goals rather than confront the issues of race and racism in the U.S.
Participants like Valerie and Eva saw themselves as potentially living in the U.S. longterm, and they were invested in issues of racial justice in the U.S. At the time of the
study, participants like Daniel, Faith, and Kariuki were not committed to staying in the
U.S. on a long-term basis, and they expressed that although they saw racism in their
classrooms as students and as teaching assistants, they tried not to be overly concerned
about it.
The theme of marginalization as emerged in the participants’ language and
identity experiences revealed a lot of parallels with some of the ideas in post-colonial
theories, Anzaldùa (1987)’s work on linguistic terrorism, as well as Phillipson (1992)’s
work on linguistic imperialism. According to Anzaldùa (1987) linguistic terrorism refers
to the dehumanization and suppression of a group of people by way of suppressing and
devaluing their languages, with the effect that the suppressed groups internalize the
268 negative perceptions of their languages and use it against themselves and against each
other. Soto & Kharem (2006) have also used the term linguistic terrorism to argue that it
is a form of terrorism to take away a people’s self worth by stripping them of their
languages. In Kenya, as a former British colony, English is aggressively promoted as the
language of upward mobility, while African languages are demonized as wrong and unfit
for school (Wa Thiong’o, 1986). Like Anzaldùa (1987) points out, “[i]n childhood we are
told that our language is wrong. Repeated attacks on our native tongue diminish our sense
of self. The attacks continue throughout our lives.” (p.80). These words by Anzaldùa
(1987) reflect some of the experiences of participants in this study as they described
experiences of being beaten, forced to perform manual labor, humiliated, because they
dared to speak their African languages in school. The attacks on their languages did not
stop at the primary and secondary school levels. Even as adult graduate students in the
U.S., they continued to face attacks based on their identities as multilingual speakers of
the English language.
The overarching theme of marginalization of African languages is closely aligned
to Phillipson (1992)’s theory of English Linguistic Imperialism and Said (1979)’s idea of
orientalism in post-colonial theory. English Linguistic Imperialism theory is defined as
when “the dominance of English is asserted and maintained by the establishment and
continuous reconstitution of structural and cultural inequalities between English and other
languages.” (Phillipson, 1992, p. 47) while orientalism is the misrepresentation of the
other where a dominant group misrepresents another group as inferior and lacking, while
representing themselves as superior (Said, 1979). Both theories caution against the
colonialist culture of self exaltation by dominant groups where the dominant group
269 creates ideal images of themselves while suppressing and devaluing other groups. The
dominant group then rationalizes this relationship between the two groups and works to
maintain their position of power by keeping the other groups at the bottom (Phillipson,
1992).
Chapter five explores the theme of (re)claiming African languages and identities.
The first part of chapter five discusses this theme within the Kenyan context as
summarized in the two sub-themes that follow:
Nuances of language and identity affiliations
There were nuances in the ways that the participants (re)claimed and connected
with their African languages and identities, and in the ways that participants chose to
affiliate themselves with those languages and identities. For example, while participants
like Faith and Kariuki claimed and privileged their African languages throughout their
experiences as students and teachers to their current experiences in the U.S., some
participants like Daniel and Eva had complex relationships with their African languages
that at some points in their lives saw them seek to distance themselves from those
languages and identities while privileging English and dominant identities. Other
participants also had complex relationships with their languages and identities, and most
either code-switched as they felt was appropriate to their context or embraced hybrid
identities, mixing their various languages and identities in ways that placed value of each
of those languages and identities.
Honoring students’ home languages
The participants all reported that the schools they worked for as teachers had strict
English-only policies, but some of them made exceptions when needed to help students
270 understand the content in their classrooms. Kariuki, for example, had students that spoke
a hybrid language that included English, Swahili, and other African languages. He would
allow students to speak this language in class if they needed to, and he would even speak
the language himself as a way to connect with the students and show them that he
understood them and their experiences. Faith also made exceptions sometimes and let
students speak in Kikuyu because she understood the difficulty that they students were
experiencing with English. The danger of losing her job was present for Sally in allowing
African languages in her class, but when necessary, she did allow students to express
their ideas in their home languages.
In the United States context, the theme of (re)claiming African languages and
identities was discussed under two subthemes as summarized below:
Nuances of language and identity affiliations
Like in the Kenyan context, there were nuances in participants’ accounts of how
they experienced their multilingualism in the United States, and their accounts of the
choices that they made in terms of what identities they affiliated themselves with.
Participants like Nicole, Faith, and Mercy, got a sense of belonging from aligning
themselves with other Kenyans in the U.S. Nicole described spending time with and
speaking Swahili with other Kenyans as a relief and a breather from the struggles and
pressures of speaking English all the time with Americans. Faith also said that for her,
Kikuyu and Swahili just flowed, and made her feel at home, when she spoke with other
Kenyans. Daniel, on the other hand, was resentful of the groupings among Kenyans in the
U.S. He felt that Kenyans in his US community grouped themselves based on their
ethnicity, and this made him feel excluded since he did not have people from his ethnic
271 community to group himself with. Eva, because of her investment in issues of race and
racism in the U.S., aligned herself with African Americans and found community with
them based on their shared experiences as black individuals in the United States.
African languages and identities as capital
The participants noted that they saw their multilingualism as assets in their
personal and professional lives. Some participants also felt that their multilingual
backgrounds enabled them to bring other, otherwise marginalized, perspectives to their
classrooms as both graduate students and teaching assistants in the U.S. For example, Eva
taught Kiswahili at her university as part of her teaching assistantship duties. She used
this platform to demystify Africa for her students, because she saw that her students had
some misconceptions about what it meant to be African. Valerie also brought in her
cultural knowledge to her classes as a teaching assistant and worked to expose her
students to perspectives that they might not otherwise have had access to. In her
transnational relationships with her family, Eva used her newfound insights about her
African languages and identity to offer advice to her siblings about the importance of
these languages and identities.
The findings under the theme of (re)claiming African languages and identities
supported and added to some findings from other studies reviewed in chapter two. For
example, in her study with primary school students in a school in Kenya, Spernes (2012)
found that although the students reported being caned for speaking their mother tongues
in school, they displayed greater mastery of content and more sophisticated articulation
of their ideas when instruction was provided to them in their mother tongue. Similarly,
this study has found that the participants reported that when they were punished for
272 speaking African languages in school, that had the counter effect of silencing them rather
than making them speak in English as intended. Therefore, their literacy learning was
impeded. On the other hand, the participants reported as teachers (e.g. Faith and Kariuki)
they used African languages as needed in order to support their students’ learning in their
classroom.
In the U.S., participants (e.g. Eva and Valerie) used their African languages and
identities as assets in their teaching. This is consistent with the literature that was
reviewed in chapter two (e.g. Haddix, 2010; Seloni, 2012), which revealed the various
ways that linguistic and cultural minority teachers in the U.S. used their multilingualism
as assets in their teaching.
One of the things that I found in the data that was surprising for me was that some
participants had some really big changes in the ways that they thought about their
languages and identities over stretches of time and contexts. For example, Eva distanced
herself from her African language, Luhya, and even Swahili throughout her schooling
and the whole time she was in Kenya. But when she moved to the United States and was
confronted with issues of race and racism, she made a complete turn and strongly
embraced her identity as an African, including her African languages. To a smaller
extent, the same was true with Mercy, who went to elite schools throughout her
childhood where African languages were rarely spoken. She did not speak her mother
tongue much until she went to her A-levels school where her peers did not look kindly on
people that could not speak their mother tongue. She then put in a lot of effort to try and
learn her African language.
273 In the section that follows, I will discuss the limitations of this study, as well as
the implications of these findings for further research, the implications for literacy
research and practice in Kenyan education, as well as the implications for educational
research and practice in U.S. universities. I will also offer some suggestions for both the
Kenyan and United States contexts.
Limitations and Implications
Limitations and Implications for Further Research
Having discussed the findings from this qualitative interview study, it is
imperative that I also discuss the limitations. One limitation of this study was that as a
researcher, I came into this study with some subjectivities, which might have influenced
the data that I collected, analyzed, and reported. As I have discussed extensively in this
dissertation, I share a similar background as the teachers in this study, being a
transnational Kenyan teacher myself. I have also had a lot of experiences similar to some
of the teachers’ experiences. However, I tried throughout this study to minimize my
influence on the data and the analysis process by constantly reminding myself of my own
positionality in relationship to this study in order to check myself any time I foresaw any
danger of my biases interfering with the process. I also made a point to not talk about my
own experiences on the topic of study with the participants. Although during interviews,
some participants sometimes used terms such as “you know?” or “you understand” to
indicate our shared understanding of what they were talking about, I did not have much
trouble keeping my own experiences to myself. Most participants were happy to talk
about their experiences without requiring me to talk about my own.
274 Because of my subjectivity in this study, it is also possible that a different
researcher with a different background may have gotten different data from the
participants. My shared background with the participants gave me access to some data
that an outsider interviewer might not have gotten. This can be a strength of this study,
but it can also be a limitation because it means that my background shaped the kind of
data that I got. In analyzing data, I may also have highlighted as important things that a
different researcher with a different background might have perceived differently.
Another limitation to this dissertation study is that the theoretical frameworks that
were used played a significant part in how data was analyzed. The same data, analyzed
under a different theoretical framework, might have yielded different findings. To
counter this limitation, I tried to include both instances where the data matched the
theories as well as when the data went against the theories. For example, one of the
teachers, Daniel, maintained a distance from his African languages and identities almost
throughout the study and did not seek connections to these aspects of his background like
most of the other participants did.
Additionally, this dissertation study employs post-colonial theory from the
perspectives of a limited number of post-colonialists, most of whom are male. Another
analysis of similar studies’ findings, using other theorists such as Angela Davis, Audre
Lorde, Linda Tuhiwai Smith, among others, that deal with decoloniality with a feminist
and/or intersectional lens, for example, might offer additional ways to think about
language and identity in post-colonial contexts, as well as additional ways to complicate
the notion of post-coloniality and decoloniality. Such a lens may provide spaces for
275 intersectional work that may interrogate the notions of sameness and difference among
colonized subjects based on class, gender, ethnicity, rural vs. urban, and so on.
Although this is a qualitative interview study that performed a total of fifty
interviews with ten participants, it might be argued that the number of participants may
also be a limitation. I interviewed ten teachers, and as such, the experiences and views
that they expressed can allow for important conversations on language and identity in
Kenyan schools and U.S. universities, but cannot in themselves broadly cover the
experiences of similar demographics in either context. Additionally, the participants were
mostly female teachers, with only three male teachers. Although gender was not a
consideration in participant recruitment and selection, it is possible that gender might
have influenced the kinds of responses that I got from the participants.
Moving forward, I would like to propose that more research be conducted to
further illuminate the experiences of Kenyan teachers. The experiences of teachers, as has
been illustrated in this study, can offer important insights that can help us understand the
meanings that these teachers make of their experiences as practitioners in education and
as important stakeholders in students’ literacy learning.
While this dissertation study focused on teachers from Kenya, there is need for
similar research studies to be conducted in other post-colonial African contexts. It will be
of interest to see research on other formerly colonized African nations like Tanzania that
took a different route with language and chose to privilege Kiswahili over English in their
education system. Further, similar research could be conducted with teachers currently
teaching in Kenyan primary and secondary schools. In conducting research with currently
276 practicing teachers, observations of their language and literacy practices in the classroom
should be made to compliment their personal accounts of their experiences.
In addition to teachers’ experiences, more research could be conducted on the
language and literacy practices of multilingual students in Kenyan schools to demonstrate
ways in which students use their African languages to support their literacy learning.
Students’ experiences with, and their ideologies surrounding their own multilingualism
would also provide a rich perspective to the conversation on multilingualism in Kenyan
schools. Research on parents’ perspectives on this conversation would also add to the
conversation, as parents are important stakeholders in their children’s language and
literacy experiences, both at school and at home. Furthermore, similar research should be
conducted in both rural and urban areas in Kenya in order to get perspectives from a
variety of contexts in Kenyan schools.
In the United States, more research could be conducted to further highlight the
experiences of African international students in US universities. This is especially
important because there is a growing number of international students (Constantine,
Anderson, Berkel, Caldwell, & Utsey, 2005), and international instructors (Seloni, 2012)
in universities in the United States, and it is of utmost importance that universities in the
United States work collaboratively with this population of students and instructors to
enrich the educational experiences of all participants in these learning communities.
Implications for Literacy Research and Practice in Kenyan Education
As summarized in the previous section, the findings from this research study
showed that the participants were forced to only speak in English at school, and they
were punished for any non-compliance with this policy by use of corporal punishment,
277 manual labor, and/or public humiliation. As discussed in the literature review in chapter
two, the marginalization of African languages is a persistent problem in post-colonial
Africa’s schools and societies (see for example Kitoko-Nsiku, 2007; Orwenjo, 2012), and
is sometimes co-signed by parents (Campbell & Walsh, 2010; Jones & Barkhuizen, 2011;
Tembe & Norton, 2008), who believe that allowing African languages in instruction will
take away from their children’s ability to have an edge in the global economy. However,
studies such as those conducted by Muthwii (2004) and Spernes (2012) indicated that
African languages are important capital that teachers can use in their classrooms to
support students’ literacy learning. This dissertation adds to these studies by pointing to
the findings after interviewing ten Kenyan teachers, which indicated that although there
were harsh punishments to their use of African languages in schools, the participants
persisted in speaking those languages. They continued to speak African languages in
schools even as teachers. There was no stopping them from speaking their native
languages because they could not separate themselves from the languages of their
families and communities, and as Wa Thiong’o (1986) noted, one’s language and their
identity are intertwined, and it is impossible to separate the two. This dissertation study
therefore suggests that schools in post-colonial African nations like Kenya should
embrace African languages as important parts of their students’ identities, and rather than
try to suppress these languages, incorporate them into classroom instruction. Students’
home languages are important capital that the teachers can tap into in not only in the
teaching of English, but also in teaching academic literacies that will help the students to
be successful in their content area classrooms as well. This dissertation study suggests
that English language proficiency, and proficiency in the literacies needed to be
278 successful in Kenyan schools, can be achieved while honoring Kenyan students’ native
languages.
Findings from this study also indicated that the participants and their peers were
silenced by the stigma that was placed on African languages and identities in their
schools and classrooms. Because they were not allowed to speak African languages, and
also because speaking these languages (or in accents associated with these languages)
often led to being ridiculed and humiliated, some of them chose to be silent instead. This
dissertation study suggests that African languages and identities (including accents)
should be destigmatized. This can be done by moving towards not just tolerating, but also
actually celebrating African languages in the schools. Schools should encourage their
teachers to teach students to embrace their languages, and to allow their students to
demonstrate that one can be literate in important academic content even when they
struggle with the English language.
The findings also indicated that oftentimes in the participants’ classrooms,
learning was heavily teacher-centered, and students had few opportunities to speak in
class. Faith, for example, indicated that in her experience, the teachers dominated
classroom talk, and as students, they did not speak much in class. This situation is
problematic because the schools expect students to learn and be able to speak in English
but provide few opportunities for them to practice speaking the language. This study
points to the need for teachers to create a lot of opportunities in their classrooms for
students to practice their language in a stigma-free environment, where students are
encouraged to practice their English without fear of prejudice should they speak it with
an African accent. In practicing their English, students could also be allowed to code-
279 switch with Swahili and other African languages as needed as they work towards fluency
in English.
The findings of this dissertation also indicated that when the participants became
teachers themselves, they were put into the same school dynamics that required them to
suppress their students’ home languages. Without specific training on working with
multilingual learners’ literacy needs, the participants were often unsure how to handle
issues of language in their classrooms. Agnes, for example, said that while she sometimes
allowed students to speak in their mother tongues in class, she was fearful of the
consequences (which included the possibility of losing her job) of doing this and would,
as much as possible, avoid allowing these languages in the classroom. Given these
findings, this study suggests that there is need to adequately prepare all Kenyan teachers
to provide instruction that honors the diverse backgrounds of the learners in their
classrooms and to use the linguistic and cultural capital that these learners bring into the
classroom to facilitate and enrich the students’ learning. In this dissertation study,
participants expressed that they did not take any courses in their teacher preparation
programs that specifically focused on preparing them for working with multilingual
learners. As I pointed out in the rationale section for this dissertation, there is a lot of
research and conversation surrounding the preparation of all teachers for working with
linguistically and culturally diverse learners in the U.S., but very little attention is paid to
this in Kenya, possibly because a majority of people in Kenya are multilingual, and so
students’ multilingualism is overlooked as something that warrants careful attention. As
teachers, participants worked in schools that promoted the same deficit ideologies
concerning students’ home languages as their own schools had done. They were required
280 to enforce the same kinds of language policies that marginalized and silenced students’
languages and identities.
The findings in this study showed that the participants were punished as students
for speaking African languages, and this often silenced them. Later on as teachers, the
same participants were required to enforce English-only policies in their schools, and the
participants reported the negative effects of this that they saw on their students. In light of
this finding, this dissertation study suggests that in order to break the cycle of teachers
being complicit in the punishing and suppression of African languages, teacher
preparation programs in Kenya and other post-colonial African nations with similar
issues might benefit from offering training for all teachers on working with linguistically
and culturally diverse learners. Such training might offer teachers research-based
perspectives on not only the importance of students’ home languages and cultures in their
literacy learning in all subjects, but also offer specific strategies for using these languages
to promote students’ literacy learning.
It would also be beneficial for teacher preparation programs to encourage student
teachers to examine their own biases regarding African languages and identities. Wa
Thiong’o (1986) argues that colonization of the mind has persisted long after physical
colonization of African nations ended. It is important that teacher preparation programs
offer courses whereby prospective teachers will be challenged to examine their own
ideologies, recognize the biases that they carry regarding African languages and
identities, and take steps to remedy any deficit thinking about these languages and
identities.
281 Additionally, teachers could be trained to have high expectations of all learners,
regardless of their linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Findings from this study indicated
that some of the participants, such as Sally, had teachers that called students fools
because they struggled with speaking in English. Another participant, Kariuki, reported
that as a teacher himself, he worked in a school culture where students were treated
differently when it came to punishment for speaking African languages, because some
students were viewed as having higher potential, and therefore the teachers expected
“better” from them than other students. The teachers’ expectations in this case were based
on deficit thinking about students. Those students who were perceived as having potential
for academic success were not expected to speak African languages. This study suggests
that teachers be given training to prepare them for work with linguistically and culturally
diverse students in ways that are supportive of their linguistic and cultural capital, and
that offer high expectations for all learners.
Implications for Educational Research and Practice in U.S. Universities
Findings from this dissertation study indicated that the participants were
marginalized both as students and as teaching assistants in their United States
universities. They had to take on identities as black individuals in the United States, and
had to educate themselves on what that meant for them in terms of how they were
perceived by their students, colleagues, and other people that they encountered. While the
participants’ African languages and identities had been marginalized in the Kenyan
context as well, it was not until they came to the United States that the connection
between their experiences of how their languages were perceived and race became
explicit for them. In light of this finding, this dissertation study makes the suggestion that
282 Kenyan teachers in U.S. universities may benefit from using the experiences with
language, race, and identity that they had in the U.S. to inform their research and practice
as future teacher educators in their country of origin. Having had experiences that opened
up their perceptions of issues of language and power, and the connections between
language, race, and identity, they could advocate for the inclusion of courses that deal
with these issues in teacher preparation program curriculums in Kenya. This may be
helpful in opening up conversations in teacher preparation program classroom where preservice teachers get opportunities to explore the deeper issues and the theories
surrounding language and identity. When teachers’ awareness of these theories are
awakened, then they will have the tools to guide their practice as they support the literacy
learning of multilingual Kenyan learners.
This study also encourages multilingual international students in U.S. universities
to recognize their multilingualism as an asset in both their personal lives, and their
professional lives as graduate students and teaching assistants. International teachers in
U.S. universities have rich linguistic and cultural identities that they could use as
important capital in inspiring global conversations in their classrooms. Education in U.S.
universities often does not include a lot of global literature (Seloni, 2012), and global
perspectives (Ma, 2014; Zheng, 2014), and international scholars can use their
backgrounds to introduced more global perspectives into their classrooms. They can work
with their students to find “third spaces” (Gutiérrez, Baquedano-Lopez, & Tejeda, 1999;
Gutiérrez, Bien, Selland, & Pierce, 2011) that incorporate the local US knowledge and
their unique knowledge and perspectives to create a richer “third space” experience for
their students. Some participants, like Valerie and Eva, used their hybrid identities as
283 speakers of both English and African languages to provide instruction that blended both
African languages and cultures with English and American culture. They offered
alternative perspectives of Africa and Africans to their students while offering a more
global perspective to classroom discussions. Ma (2014) and Zheng (2014) assert that
while international teachers in U.S. universities should adjust to the U.S. educational
circumstances, which may be different from their home countries, they should also use
their linguistic and cultural background as an additional resource.
All participants felt that their time in the United States had taught them a lot and
forced them to think about some issues, such as race, that they had not had to spend a lot
of time thinking about before. International teachers in U.S. universities, as demonstrated
in this study, have language and identity experiences that might provide rich data that
they can use to help them reflect on their teaching practices in Kenya. They could use the
knowledge and perspectives received from their time in the U.S. to inform their practice
once they return to their home countries. All participants experienced the marginalization
of their African languages in Kenya, and some of them even reported feeling that this
marginalization of African languages was warranted. But being in the United States put
them in a position where they experienced this same marginalization on a more personal
level from other people. Eva, for example, strived to distance herself from African
languages and identities while in Kenya, but coming to the U.S., she was at the receiving
end of marginalization as a black African. It did not matter that she thought she spoke
English well, and that she went to a national school in Kenya. In the U.S., she was forced
to confront issues of race and racism, and come to terms with her own identities. While
all participants’ experiences were different, and every international student’s experiences
284 are different, all international and transnational students in the U.S. can learn from their
experiences in the U.S. and use the knowledge and experience they acquire to inform
their practice when, and if, they choose to go back to their home countries.
Participants in this study cited language as one of the major issues that they faced
in the United States. Coming from Kenya, where English is the language of instruction in
schools, all participants had a good command of the English language by the time they
came to the U.S. But their varieties of English, and their accents, were often marginalized
in their US classrooms. As students, they sometimes did not understand when professors
spoke too fast. And when they made contributions in class, they were often asked to
repeat themselves, which further silenced them. It is important for instructors in U.S.
universities to be sensitive to the fact that international students are adjusting as bilingual
and bicultural learners, even as they learn the content under instruction in their
classrooms. In their role as teaching assistants, some participants reported being ignored
by students, who chose to work with American teaching assistants instead, because of
their language and accents. International scholars bring a wealth of knowledge into
American classrooms (He, 2014; Ma, 2014; Zheng, 2014), and it is important for
universities to encourage all students to interact with international students and teaching
assistants in order to learn more about them and what knowledge they bring to the
classroom before making judgments on their intelligence and abilities based on race,
nationality, language, and accents.
Instructors with international students in their classrooms are also encouraged to
have an open mind to learning about other cultures and be willing to find a middle ground
where the different backgrounds in the classroom can work together to create a more
285 inclusive educational experience for all. Some participants, like Isaac and Faith, reported
that they spent time in some classes quietly listening to other people speak because they
did not feel that they could speak in those spaces. It is important that U.S. universities
welcome everyone in their classrooms into the learning experience. By welcoming
perspectives from different backgrounds and creating classroom environments where
differences in cultural and linguistic backgrounds are not only acknowledged, but valued
as well, they may help to make the learning and teaching experiences of multilingual
international students like those that participated in this study more positive and
rewarding.
To achieve this, instructors in U.S. classrooms could engage in discussions and
collaborative efforts with teachers and students from various cultural backgrounds. In
order to better appreciate the needs of international students and teaching assistants, there
is need for instructors to have opportunities to interact and work with international
students from diverse backgrounds. One of the participants in this study, Valerie,
recounted the struggles she underwent as a new international student in her classroom.
Some of her struggles included feelings of discomfort as she was not conversant with the
cultural jargon that was thrown around in her classrooms, and also being judged on her
silence in class, when to her, the silence was because she was not accustomed to the
American classroom. With more opportunities to interact with, and have dialogues with
international students, American instructors in U.S. universities may have a better
understanding of what the needs of these students are and work to make their classrooms
more welcoming to diverse students.
286 Some participants, like Valerie, Nicole, and Eva, also observed that some
instructors, and some colleagues, in their US classrooms made demeaning comments
about Africa and Africans that were often a result of stereotypes about the continent and
its peoples. It is important for instructors to be positive and respectful when making
comments about other cultures. While instructors might have opinions about other
cultures, they should keep in mind that being culturally relevant is supposed to make
teaching more effective, not to provide a platform to critique other cultures in a negative
manner (Zheng, 2014). In a healthy learning environment, all members should guard
against any biases that they might hold, and work to develop understanding, and balanced
perspectives about other languages, identities, and cultures. The experiences of the
participants in this dissertation study, as recounted in their interviews, showed that they
valued their vast repertoires of languages and identities, and even in contexts where
aspects of their African languages and identities were systematically suppressed, they
drew from those languages and identities to inform their personal, academic, and
professional lives. It is therefore imperative that the linguistic and cultural capital that
multilingual international students bring to the U.S. classroom is not only accepted, but
also celebrated as rich capital that adds to the learning experiences of everyone in the
learning community.
Finally, a major suggestion this dissertation makes is on the need for U.S.
universities to foster solidarity among and between international students and other
groups of students. As demonstrated in this dissertation study, there are often groupings
among students that exclude other students with different identities. This sometimes leads
to a distrust that may cause even wider rifts among these groups. For example, Nicole
287 pointed out that she felt excluded when African Americans talked about their experiences
with racism while taking on the attitude that she, as a recent immigrant from Africa, did
not understand those experiences. Faith also noted that every group at the university she
went to tended to stick together. For example, the white Americans grouped themselves
together, and the same was also true for African Americans and international students
from different countries. Fostering a sense of solidarity among all these groups may be
beneficial in breaking down some of the barriers to communication among students from
different backgrounds. One way to do this may be by encouraging open conversations in
the classrooms about sameness and difference, and what these mean as we engage
collectively in the pursuit of our work in literacy education, as well as in education in
general.
Conclusion
This dissertation study was completed with ten Kenyan teachers who were
pursuing graduate education at various universities in the United States at the time of the
study. The aim was to explore the language and identity experiences of these teachers
within the domains of their primary and secondary schooling in Kenya, their teacher
preparation in Kenya, their teaching experiences in Kenya, and their graduate education
in the United States. A total of fifty interviews were conducted, transcribed, and the data
analyzed using thematic analysis. The dissertation is organized in six chapters. Chapter
one provides a rationale for the study, gives a historical background of language in
Kenyan education, and explains the research focus of the study. The first chapter also
defines the major terms used throughout this dissertation, and gives an overview of the
entire dissertation. Chapter two provides a review of the literature from both the Kenyan
288 and the United States contexts, and a discussion of the theories used to frame this study.
Chapter three discusses the methodology used in conducting this study, including an
introduction of qualitative interview as an inquiry method, a description of the participant
recruitment and selection methods, and an overview of the data analysis process. Chapter
three also provides a discussion of my background while positioning me within this
research. The chapter ends with an introduction to the ten participants that took part in
this study.
The two findings chapters, four and five, present the findings from the analysis of
data collected in this study. There are two major findings in this dissertation study. The
first major finding is that the participants’ African languages and identities were
marginalized in both the Kenyan context and the United States contexts. In Kenya,
participants reported being silenced by the ways that these languages and identities were
suppressed in their schools. There was a hierarchy of languages, with English at the top
of the hierarchy, and African languages at the bottom. However, in various ways,
participants resisted this marginalization. For example, some participants worked to find
spaces where they could speak those languages without the risk of punishment, whether it
was by hiding or bribing. In the U.S., participants reported being silenced by the ways
that their languages and accents, which were linked to their race as black Africans, were
treated as deficit. The second finding is that in various ways, participants (re)claimed
their African languages in both the Kenyan and the U.S. contexts. In Kenya, they
privileged those languages in various contexts, and found ways to honor students’ home
languages in their teaching despite policies that suppressed those languages. In the United
States, they formed communities with other Africans and African Americans and worked
289 to (re)claim their African languages and identities as assets, both in their personal and
professional lives.
The implications of these findings have been discussed in this chapter, and
recommendations have been made for future directions in literacy research and practice
in Kenyan education, as well as for educational research and practice in U.S. universities
with international students. While the ten participants in this study have been invaluable
in providing insight into their experiences with language and identity in Kenya and the
United States, I would like to emphasize that Kenyan teachers are all individually unique
in the ways that they experience their multilingualism and their identities. This
dissertation study therefore does not wish to impose its participants’ personal experiences
to all post-colonial African nations or peoples. While this study focused on both the
Kenyan and the United States contexts in the experiences of the teachers, I want to
emphasize that my intention is not to say that Kenyan teachers need to come to the
United States in order to get enough distance to be able to interrogate their experiences
with language and identity. Teachers in Kenya can and should reflect on their experiences
with, and their beliefs about language. Coming to the United States is not a prerequisite
to being able to do this. The transnational connections made sense for this particular
study, as explained in chapter one, but it is by no means a requirement for other studies
on this important topic.
Through this study, I have highlighted the post-colonial language and identity
experiences ten transnational Kenyan teachers in various universities in the United States.
It is my hope that findings from this dissertation study will be of interest to the intended
audience of this work (mainly teachers, administrators, parents, and other educational
290 stakeholders in Kenya, and universities in the U.S.), as well as other audiences interested
in the continuing conversations on the issues surrounding literacy, language, race, and
power in schools and universities both in post-colonial Africa, and the United States.
291 APPENDIX A
Syracuse University
Interview Protocol
Nyaboke Nduati, PhD Candidate
School of Education, Department of Reading and Language Arts
Title of Study: THE POST-COLONIAL LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY
EXPERIENCES OF TRANSNATIONAL KENYAN TEACHERS IN U.S.
UNIVERSITIES
Semi-structured interview protocol for Participants.
Protocol 1: Family Background and K-12 Kenyan Schooling Experiences
Tell me about your family history. (e.g. what your parents do? Where you were born?
Your siblings? Your extended family?)
Tell me about your cultural and language background.
Tell me about the language practices in your family.
292 Tell me about the attitudes toward your native language, Kiswahili, and English in your
family.
Tell me about the cultural practices in your family.
Tell me about your feelings towards your cultural background.
Tell me about your early education. (e.g. where did you go to school? What kind of
student were you?)
Tell me about the language policy in your K-12 schools. (e.g. classroom language policy?
outside classroom but within school building?)
How was the language policy enforced in your K-12 schooling.
Tell me about the attitudes toward African languages, Kiswahili, and English in your K12 education schools.
What types of reading and writing did you see and do throughout your K-12 education.
Tell me about how you learned to read and write.
Tell me about your reading and writing experiences in the various languages that you
speak (English, Kiswahili, your native African language).
Tell me about your classmates throughout your K-12 education. (e.g. what were their
language and cultural backgrounds? What languages did they speak? What languages did
you speak in your interactions with them? What was accepted? What was not accepted?)
Tell me about the cultural and language backgrounds of teachers in your K-12 education.
Tell me about your most memorable teachers from your K-12 education.
Tell me about ways your experiences with language in your K-12 schooling influence
you as a person.
Tell me about your thoughts on race as you were growing up in Kenya.
293 Syracuse University
Interview Protocol
Nyaboke Nduati, PhD Candidate
School of Education, Department of Reading and Language Arts
Title of Study: THE POST-COLONIAL LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY
EXPERIENCES OF TRANSNATIONAL KENYAN TEACHERS IN U.S.
UNIVERSITIES
Semi-structured interview protocol for Participants.
Protocol 2: Kenyan Teacher Preparation Experiences
Tell me about your decision to become a teacher.
Tell me about the kinds of courses that you took in your teacher preparation program.
Tell me about any courses you took that you feel tackled issues of language in the
classroom.
Tell me about other ways your teacher preparation program prepared you for teaching in
multilingual classrooms.
294 Tell me about your experiences with your teaching practice. (e.g. Which school did you
teach at? What level did you teach? How prepared did you feel for the task of teaching
that classroom?)
Tell me about your comfort levels with each of your spoken languages by the time you
joined your teacher preparation program.
Tell me about your attitudes toward your African language, Kiswahili, and English when
you started off your program.
Tell me about your experiences with language as a pre-service teacher.
Tell me about the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of your students and colleagues.
Tell me about the language policy at the school and how was it enforced.
Tell me about how you personally enforced the language policy in your classroom.
Tell me about your strengths and weaknesses as a teacher in a multilingual classroom at
that point in your teacher preparation.
Tell me about ways you worked to build on your strengths and address your weaknesses
as a multilingual teacher in a multilingual classroom at that point in your teacher
preparation.
Tell me about your thoughts on race while you were a teacher in Kenya.
Tell me about any other experiences you had with language during your teacher
preparation.
295 Syracuse University
Interview Protocol
Nyaboke Nduati, PhD Candidate
School of Education, Department of Reading and Language Arts
Title of Study: THE POST-COLONIAL LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY
EXPERIENCES OF TRANSNATIONAL KENYAN TEACHERS IN U.S.
UNIVERSITIES
Semi-structured interview protocol for Participants.
Protocol 3: Kenyan Teaching Experiences
Tell me about your decision to pursue teaching after your teacher preparation? (Because
in Kenya many people are forced to study education by government choice, and once
they graduate they pursue careers other than teaching).
Tell me about your teaching background. (e.g. When did you start teaching? Which
schools did you teach at?)
Tell me about your comfort levels with each of your spoken languages by the time you
started teaching as a certified teacher.
296 Tell me about your attitudes toward your African language, Kiswahili, and English when
you started teaching as a certified teacher.
Tell me about your experiences with language as a certified teacher.
Tell me about your experiences with your teaching when you started teaching as a
certified teacher. (e.g. Which school did you teach at? What level did you teach? How
prepared did you feel for the task of teaching that classroom?)
Tell me about the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of your students and colleagues.
Tell me about the language policy at the school and how was it enforced.
Tell me about how you personally enforced the language policy in your classroom.
Tell me about your strengths and weaknesses as a teacher in a multilingual classroom at
that point in your teaching career.
Tell me about ways you worked to build on your strengths and address your weaknesses
as a multilingual teacher in a multilingual classroom at that point in your teaching career.
Tell me about any other experiences you had with language during your years teaching as
a certified teacher.
297 Syracuse University
Interview Protocol
Nyaboke Nduati, PhD Candidate
School of Education, Department of Reading and Language Arts
Title of Study: THE POST-COLONIAL LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY
EXPERIENCES OF TRANSNATIONAL KENYAN TEACHERS IN U.S.
UNIVERSITIES
Semi-structured interview protocol for Participants.
Protocol 4: U.S. Graduate Education Experiences
Tell me about your decision to pursue graduate education in the U.S.
Tell me about your initial impressions of the U.S. (the country, the culture, the people)
Tell me about the earliest relationships (professional or personal) that you established
when you first arrived in the U.S.
Tell me about your comfort level with the English language when you first arrived in the
U.S.
298 Tell me about your experiences in the U.S. classroom during your first year of graduate
studies in the U.S.
Tell me about the cultural and language backgrounds of your colleagues and professors in
your classes.
Tell me about your language experiences with your colleagues and professors in the U.S.
classroom so far.
Tell me about your language experiences socially with friends and colleagues since you
have been in the U.S.
Tell me about the factors that inform your choice of language to speak in different
contexts (e.g. academic, social, family etc.).
Tell me about ways your cultural and language background have influenced you as an
international student here in the U.S.
Tell me about courses you took here in the U.S. that impacted your views on language.
Tell me about your experiences with race here in the U.S.
Tell me about the Kenyan/African community in your area here in the U.S., and the
language practices of that Kenyan community.
Tell me about your language practices with your family and friends back home since you
have been here in the U.S.
Tell me about your current attitudes toward your African language, Kiswahili, English.
Tell me about ways your cultural and language background influences you as a student
and as a teaching assistant now.
Tell me about ways your past educational (e.g. language and literacy) experiences
influence your present beliefs and practices as a student and as a teaching assistant.
299 Tell me about your strengths as a multilingual student and teaching assistant in the U.S.
graduate classroom? Weaknesses?
Tell me about ways your being multilingual influences you outside of your role as a
student and/or teaching assistant (e.g. socially).
Tell me about the impact your language experiences here in the U.S. have had on you as
a teacher and future teacher educator.
300 Syracuse University
Interview Protocol
Nyaboke Nduati, PhD Candidate
School of Education, Department of Reading and Language Arts
Title of Study: THE POST-COLONIAL LANGUAGE AND IDENTITY
EXPERIENCES OF TRANSNATIONAL KENYAN TEACHERS IN U.S.
UNIVERSITIES
Semi-structured interview protocol for Participants.
Protocol 5: Future Plans and Aspirations
Tell me about your career plans for after completing your program.
Tell me about your decision to (move back to Kenya/ stay in the U.S.) after completing
your program.
Tell me about ways your experiences with language up until this point might influence
your future as a person & ways they might influence you as a teacher educator in the
future..
301 Tell me about specific things you have learned about language and multilingualism that
you might use in your capacity as a teacher educator in the future.
Tell me about what your ideal teacher preparation program for multilingual teachers of
multilingual learners might look like (in Kenya? In the U.S.?)
Tell me about your language aspirations for your children (if you have or plan to have
any) in terms of the languages you would like them to speak in various contexts and why.
Tell me about your language aspirations for Kenya in terms of where you would like to
see the country headed linguistically.
Tell me about what your language aspirations for Kenyan schools are in terms of what
you think the language policy should be and how you think it should be enforced in the
future.
Tell me about any other language and cultural aspirations that you have for your future as
a future multilingual teacher educator.
302 References
Achebe, C. (1958). Things Fall Apart. London: William Heinneman Lt.
Achebe, C. (1973). Africa and her writers. The Massachusetts Review, 14(3), 617-629.
Achebe, C. (1994). The African Writer and the English Language. In P. Williams, & L.
Chrisman, Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory - A Reader (pp. 428434). New York: Columbia University Press.
Achebe, C. (2006a). Named For Victorial, Queen Of England. In B. Ashcroft, G.
Griffiths, & H. Tiffin, The Post-Colonial studies Reader (pp. 143-145). Oxford:
Routledge.
Achebe, C. (2006b). The Politics Of Language. In B. Ashcroft, G. Griffiths, & H. Tiffin,
The Post-Colonial Studies Reader (pp. 268-271). Oxford: Routledge.
Ahmad, A. (1994). Orientalism and After. In P. Williams, & L. Chrisman, Colonial
Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory - A Reader (pp. 162-171). New York:
Columbia University Press.
Andreotti, V. (2011). Actionable Postcolonial Theory in Education. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Beynon, J., Ilieva, R., Dichupa, M., & Hirji, S. (2003). "Do you know your language?"
how teachers of Punjabi and Chinese ancestries construct their family languages
in their personal and professional lives. Journal of Language, Identity, and
Education, 2(1), 1-27.
303 Bhabha, H. K. (2000). DissemiNation: Time, Narrative, and the Margins of the Modern
Nation. In D. Brydon, Postcolonialism: Critical Concepts in literary and cultural
studies (pp. 610-644). London: Routledge.
Bhabha, H., & Comaroff, J. (2002). Speaking of Postcoloniality, in the Continuous
Present: A Converstation. In A. Quayson, & D. T. Goldberg, Relocating
Postcolonialism (pp. 15-46). Hong Kong: Blackwell Publishers.
Binaisa, N. (2013). Ugandans in Britain Making ‘New’ Homes: Transnationalism, Place
and Identity within Narratives of Integration. Journal Of Ethnic & Migration
Studies, 39(6), 885-902. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2013.765649
Blackledge, A. (2006). The magical frontier between the dominant and the dominated:
Sociolinguistics and social justice in a multilingual world. Journal of Multilingual
and Multicultural Development, 27(1), 22-41.
Boyatzis, R. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code
development. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Bryce-Laporte, R. (1972). Black Immigrants: The Experience of Invisibility and
Inequality. Journal of Black Studies.
Campbell, D., & Walsh, P. (2009). English in Kenyan education. Intercultural Education,
20(6), 579-586.
Campbell, D. & Walsh P. (2010). All have to live in me...: A study of the use of English
alongside other African languages in a Kenyan school. Intercultural Education,
21(1), 55.
Chimbutane, F. (2011). Rethinking bilingual education in postcolonial contexts. Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
304 Clark, E. R., & Flores, B. B. (2001). Who am I? the social construction of ethnic identity
and self-perceptions in Latino pre service teachers. Urban Review, 33(2), 69-86.
Collins, P. H. (2004a). Learning From the Outsider Within: The Sociological
Significance of Black Feminist Thought. In Sandra Harding, Ed., The Feminist
Standpoint Theory Reader (pp. 103-126). New York: Routledge.
Collins, P. H. (2004b). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the
politics of empowerment (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Constantine, M. G., Anderson, G. M., Berkel, L. A., Caldwell, L. D., & Utsey, S. O.
(2005). Examining the cultural adjustment experiences of African international
college students: A qualitative analysis American Psychological Association,
750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/62138148?accountid=14214
Delpit, L., & Dowdy, J. K. (2002). The Skin That We Speak - Thoughts on language and
cluture in the classroom. New York: The New Press.
Ernst-Slavit, G., Carrison, C., & Spiesman-Laughlin, J. (2009). Creating Opportunities
for "Grand Conversations" Among ELLs With Literature Circles. In I. R.
Associations, One Classroom, Many Learners: Best Literacy Practices for
Today's Multilingual Classrooms (pp. 91-118). Newark: International Reading
Association.
Fanon, F. (1952). Black Skin, White Masks. Paris: Editions du Seuil.
Fanon, F. (1963). The Wretched of the Earth. Paris: Presence Africaine.
Gandhi, L. (1998). Postcolonial Theory: A Crtical Introduction. New York: Columbia
University Press.
305 Gatua, M. W., PhD. (2014). Sailing against the wind: Voices of Kenyan adult women in
U.S. postsecondary education and sociocultural contexts. Adult Learning, 25(2),
39-46. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1545623912?accountid=14214
Gibbons, P. (2009). English learners, academic literacy, and thinking: Learning in the
challenge zone. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gibson, M.A. & Ogbu, J.U. (1991). Minority status and schooling: A comparative study
of immigrant and involuntary minorities. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
Giroux, H. A. (2008). Teacher education and democratic schooling. In A. Darder, M. P.
Baltodano, & R. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (2nd ed., pp. 438459). New York, NY: Routledge.
Godley, A. J., Sweetland, J., Wheeler, R. S., Minnici, A., & Carpenter, B. D. (2006).
Preparing teachers for dialectally diverse classrooms. Educational Researcher,
35(8), 30-37.
Goldenberg, C., & Coleman, R. (2010). Promoting academic achievement among English
learners : A guide to the research . California: Corwin.
Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity:
Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, &
Activity: An International Journal, 6(4), 286-303.
Gutiérrez, K. D., Bien, A. C., Selland, M. K., & Pierce, D. M. (2011). Polylingual and
polycultural learning ecologies: Mediating emergent academic literacies for
306 dual language learners. Journal Of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 232-261.
doi:10.1177/1468798411399273
Haddix, M. (2010). No Longer on the Margins: Researching the Hybrid Literate
Identities of Black and Latina Pre service Teachers. Research in the Teaching of
English. 45(2), 97-123.
Haddix, M. (2012). Talkin' in the Company of My Sistas: The Counterlanguages and
Deliberate Silences of Black Female Students in Teacher Education.
Linguistics And Education: An International Research Journal, 23(2), 169-181.
He, Y. (2014). Becoming a Chinese teacher educator in the southeastern United States. In
East meets west in teacher preparation: Crossing Chinese and American Borders
(pp. 27-40). New York: Teachers College Press.
Jiménez, R.,T., Smith, P. H., & Teague, B. L. (2009). Transnational and community
literacies for teachers. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(1), 16-26.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216922155?accountid=14214
Jones, J. M., & Barkhuizen, G. (2011). "It Is Two-Way Traffic": Teachers' Tensions in
the Implementation of the Kenyan Language-in-Education Policy. International
Journal Of Bilingual Education And Bilingualism, 14(5), 513-530.
Jones, J. M. (2012). Language at the brink of conflict: Micro-language planning in one
western Kenyan school. Language Policy, 11(2), 119-143.
Jones, J. M. (2014). The "ideal" vs. the "reality": Medium of instruction policy and
implementation in different class levels in a western Kenyan school. Current
307 Issues in Language Planning, 15(1), 22-38. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1651838011?accountid=14214
Jordão, C. M. (2009). English as a foreign language, globalization and conceptual
questioning. Globalization, Societies and Education, 7(1), 95-107.
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. (2009). Summary of Population and Housing
Census 2009. Nairobi: KNBS.
Kingei, G. (2001). Pitfalls in Kenya's postcolonial language policy. Per Linguam, 36-47.
Kitoko-Nsiku, E. (2007). Dogs' Languages or People's Languages? The Return of Bantu
Languages to Primary Schools in Mozambique. Current Issues In Language
Planning, 8(2), 258-282.
Lippi-Green, R. (2004). Language ideology and language prejudice. In E. Finegan (Ed.),
Language in the USA themes for the twenty first century (pp. 289-304).New
York: Cambridge university press.
Ma, W. (2014). Integration and transformation: The teaching experiences and
pedagogical journeys of four Chinese professors. In East meets west in teacher
preparation: Crossing Chinese and American Borders (pp. 64-78). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Maeda, M. (2009). Education and cultural hybridity: What cultural values should be
imparted to students in Kenya? Compare: A journal of comparative and
international education, 39(3), 335-348.
308 Mazrui, A. (1995). Slang and Code-Switching: The Case of Sheng in Kenya. AAP, 168179.
Moll, L. C. (2004). Rethinking resistance. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 35(1),
126-131. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/218123654?accountid=14214
Moore-Gilbert, B. (1997). Postcolonial Theory: Contexts, Practices, Politics. London:
Verso.
Muthwii, M. J. (2004). Language planning and literacy in Kenya: Living with unresolved
paradoxes. Current Issues in Language Planning, 5(1), 34-50.
Nabea, W. (2009). Language Policy in Kenya: Negotiation. The Journal of Pan African
Studies,, 121-138.
Nieto, S. (2002). Language, culture, and teaching: Critical perspectives for a new
century. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum.
Nieto, S. (2008). Bringing bilingual education out of the basement and other imperatives
for teacher education. In A. Darder, M. P. Baltodano, & R. Torres (Eds.), The
critical pedagogy reader (2nd ed., pp. 469-482). New York, NY: Routledge.
Nora, J., & e., Wollman. J. (2009). Organizing Classroom Instruction That Supports
ELLs: Promoting Student Engagement and Oral Development. In I. R.
Association, One Classroom, Many Learners: Best Literacy Practices for Today's
Multilingual Classrooms (pp. 161-179). Newark: International Reading
Assocation.
Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2011). Identity, language learning, and social change.
Language Teaching, 44, 412-446.
309 Nyaga, S., & Anthonissen, C. (2012). Teaching in linguistically diverse classrooms:
Difficulties in the implementation of the language-in-education policy in
multilingual Kenyan primary school classrooms. Compare, 42(6), 863-879.
Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1550992167?accountid=14214
Ogbu (1992). Adaptation to minority status and impact on school success. Theory into
Practice, 31(4), 287-295.
Onchera, P. (2013). The pedagogical hindrances to oral communication skills in English
in Kenya: A case of secondary schools in Kisii County. Educational Research,
4(7), 536-542. Retrieved from http://www.interesjournals.org/ER
Ortaçtepe, D. (2013). "This is called free-falling theory not culture shock!": A narrative
inquiry on second language socialization. Journal of Language, Identity, and
Education, 12(4), 215-229. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1651830938?accountid=14214
Orwenjo, D. O. (2012). Multilingual education in Kenya: Debunking the myths.
International Journal of Multilingualism, 9(3), 294-317.
Osinde, K., & Abdulaziz, M. (1997). Sheng and English: the development of mixed
codes among the urban youth in. International Socilogy of Language vol 125, 4363.
Pailliotet, A. (1997). "I'm Really Quiet": A Case Study of an Asian, Language Minority
Pre service Teacher's Experiences. Teaching And Teacher Education, 13(7), 67590.
310 Parry, B. (2002). Directions and Dead Ends in Postcolonial Studies. In A. Quayson, & D.
T. Goldberg, Relocating Postcolonialism (pp. 66-81). Hong Kong: Blackwell
Publishers.
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. New York; Oxford [England]: Oxford
University Press.
Ramone, J. (2011). Postcolonial Theories. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Razfar, A., & Rumenapp, J. C. (2012). Language ideologies in English learner
classrooms: Critical reflections and the role of explicit awareness. Language
Awareness, 21(4), 347-368.
Reyes, M. d. l. L. (1992). Challenging venerable assumptions: Literacy instruction for
linguistically different students. Harvard Educational Review, 62(4), 427-427.
Ripley Crandall, B. (2012). A “responsibility to speak out“: Perspectives on writing from
black African-born male youth with limited or disrupted formal education(Order
No. 3509992). Available from Dissertations & Theses @ Syracuse University.
(1021380827). Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libezproxy2.syr.edu/docview/1021380827?accountid
=14214
Said, E. (1979). Orientalism. Vintage books.
Said, E. (2002). In Conversation with Neeladri Bhattacharya, Suvir Kaul, and Ania
Loomba. In A. Quayson, & D. T. Goldberg, Relocating Postcolonialism (pp. 114). Hong Kong: Blackwell Publishers.
311 Schmidt, P., Gangemi, B., Kelsey, G., LaBarbera, C., McKenzie, S., Melchior, C., et al.
(2009). My Language, My Culture: Helping Teachers Connect Home and School
for English Literacy Learning. In I. R. Association, One Classroom, Many
Learners: Best Literacy Practices for Today's Multilingual Classrooms (pp. 227250). Newark: International Reading Association.
Seloni, L. (2012). Going Beyond the Native-Nonnative English Speaker Divide in
College Courses: The Role of Nonnative English-Speaking Educators in
Promoting Critical Multiculturalism. Journal On Excellence In College Teaching,
23(3), 129-155.
Shin, H. (2011). Rethinking TESOL from a SOL's perspective: Indigenous epistemology
and decolonizing praxis in TESOL. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 3(2),
21.
Skolaski, J. P. (2012). Boundary Spanning in Higher Education: How Universities Can
Enable Success (Doctoral dissertation, University Of Wisconsin – Madison,
2012). Ann Arbor, Wisconsin: ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Song, J. (2011). Globalization, Children's Study Abroad, and Transnationalism as an
Emerging Context for Language Learning: A New Task for Language Teacher
Education. TESOL Quarterly: A Journal For Teachers Of English To Speakers Of
Other Languages And Of Standard English As A Second Dialect, 45(4), 749-758.
Soto, D. L., & Kharem, H. (2006). A post-monolingual education. International Journal
of Educational Policy, Research & Practice, 7(1), 21-34.
312 Spernes, K. (2012). 'I use my mother tongue at home and with friends -- not in school!'
multilingualism and identity in rural Kenya. Language, Culture and
Curriculum, 25(2), 189-203.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2012.683531
Spivak, G. C. (1994). Can the Subaltern Speak? In P. Williams, & L. Chrisman, Colonial
Discourse and Post-Colonial Theory (pp. 66-111). New York : Columbia
University Press.
Tembe, J., & Norton, B. (2008). Promoting Local Languages in Ugandan Primary
Schools: The Community as Stakeholder. Canadian Modern Language Review,
65(1), 33-60.
Wa Thiong'o, N. (1986). Decolonising the Mind - The Politics of Language in African
Literature. Nairobi: Heinemann Kenya.
Wa Thiong'o, N. (1993). Moving the Center - The Struggle for Cultural Freedoms.
Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers.
Wa Thiong'o, N. (1994). The Language of African Literature. In P. Williams, & L.
Chrisman, Colonial Discourse and Post-colonial Theory - A Reader (pp. 435456). New York: Columbia University Press.
Weisman, E. M. (2001). Bicultural identity and language attitudes: Perspectives of four
Latina teachers. Urban Education, 36(2), 203-225.
Xu, S.H. (2010). Teaching English language learners: Literacy strategies and resources
for K-6. New York: Guilford Publishers.
313 Zheng, B. (2014). Being culturally relevant in teaching. In East meets west in teacher
preparation: Crossing Chinese and American Borders (pp. 41-53). New York:
Teachers College Press.
314 VITA
Rosemary Nyaboke Nduati, PhD
Literacy Education
Syracuse University, School of Education
Reading and Language Arts Department
109 Douglas Avenue, Liverpool, NY, 13088, USA
Phone: +1 315 572 1359, Email: [email protected]
NATIONALITY: Kenyan
EDUCATION
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) - Literacy Education
Syracuse University – Syracuse, NY
May 2016
Master of Fine Art (MFA) - Creative Writing
Syracuse University – Syracuse, NY
August 2010
Bachelor of Education (B.Ed) - French, Literature
Kenyatta University – Nairobi, Kenya
December 2007
UNIVERSITY TEACHING EXPERIENCE
School of Education; Reading and Language Arts Department; Syracuse University (20102016)
Instructor: RED 326/625: Literacy Across The Curriculum
Field Practicum Supervisor: RED 326/625: Literacy Across The Curriculum
Teaching Fellow: EDU 760: Pedagogical Strategies for Teaching Undergraduates
Supervisor- EDU 508: Student Teaching in English Education
Teaching Assistant: SED 415/615: Teacher Development: Assessment and Data-Driven
Instruction
315 Teaching Mentor: The Graduate School, Syracuse University
Graduate Assistant: RED 671-Literacy Clinic
Teaching Assistant: CLS 105: College Learning Strategies
Literacy Camp Director: RED 326/625: Literacy Across the Curriculum
Teaching Assistant: RED 614: Composing Processes
College of Arts and Sciences; English Department; Syracuse University (2007-2010)
Instructor: WRT 120: Writing Enrichment
Instructor: WRT 105: Academic Writing Studio
PUBLICATIONS
Nduati , Nyaboke; LaToya L. Sawyer & Marcelle Haddix. (2012 February 14) Review of
Freire, Teaching, and Learning: Culture Circles Across Contexts by Mariana
Souto-Manning. Education Review, 15. Retrieved [Date] from
http://www.edrev.info/reviews/rev1152.pdf
Nduati, Nyaboke. "Bargaining for Gabriel." Joyland Magazine 4 Apr. 2015. Web.
Nduati, Nyaboke. "Safe to Cry." Akashic Books 24 Feb. 2015. Web.
PAPER PRESENTATIONS TO NATIONAL & INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES
Nduati, N. (2016). “The whole day they never opened their mouths”: Teaching English in
Post-colonial African Contexts. To be presented at the Tenth International
Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois.
Nduati, N. (2016). Kenyan Teachers' Perspectives on Language and Literacy in Kenyan
Schools. To be presented at the Tenth International Congress of Qualitative
Inquiry, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois.
Nduati, N. (2016). Becoming Raced: Kenyan International Students’ Experiences with
Language and Race in the United States. To be presented at the Tenth
International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois.
Nduati, N. (2016). The Post-Colonial Language and Identity Narratives Of Transnational
Kenyan Teachers in US Universities. To be presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
316 Nduati, N., Williams, K., & Hodge, R. (2016). "Becoming Who We Were Meant To Be:
Black Teachers’ Experiences of Teaching and Becoming Teachers." To be
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Washington, DC.
Nduati, N. (2015). The Post-Colonial Language and Identity Narratives Of Transnational
Kenyan Teachers in US Universities. Presented at the annual meeting of the
Literacy Research Association, Carlsbad, California.
Nduati, N. (2015). The Post-Colonial Language and Identity Narratives Of Transnational
Kenyan Teachers in US Universities. Presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Nduati, N. (2014). The Language and Identity Construction Narratives of Multilingual
Kenyan-born Teachers in US Higher Education. Presented at the Tenth
International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Champaign-Urbana, Illinois.
Haddix, M. and Nduati, N. (2012). Cultivating racial and linguistic diversity in literacy
teacher education. Co-presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research
Association, San Diego, California.
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
American Educational Research Association (AERA)
Literacy Research Association (LRA)
National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE)
Central New York Reading Association (CNYRA)
317